DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 4,723,831 to Johnson et al. in view of WO 2014/053884 A1 patent publication.
Regarding claim 1, Johnson teaches a cable assembly, comprising: an optical fiber cable (10, Fig. 3), comprising: a cable jacket (first jacket 15) having a length (for any length of the cable), an inner surface (facing a core wrap 12), and an outer surface (facing outward), the inner surface defining a central bore (defined by the core wrap 12) extending along a longitudinal axis of the optical fiber cable (along the length of the cable) and the outer surface defining an outermost surface of the optical fiber cable (as illustrated in Fig. 3); at least one tensile strand (non-metallic strength members 16, col. 7, ll. 3-11) disposed between the inner surface and the outer surface of the cable jacket (Fig. 3), wherein the at least one tensile strand has a length that is substantially equal to or greater than the length of the cable jacket (twisted or stranded strength members are inherently greater in length than the jacket); at least one optical element (optical fibers 13) disposed within the central bore of the cable jacket.
Johnson does not specify a linear density of the at least one tensile strand, which is formed of a material selected from the group consisting of a glass, basalt, a polyester, an ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene, and a polymer having an elastic modulus of at least 30 GPa. The ‘884 publication discloses a tubular article (1, Fig. 1) comprising inner and outer tubes (10, 12, equivalent to a jacket), and a reinforcing layer (11) disposed between the inner and outer tubes, wherein the reinforcing layer (11) comprises a hybrid cord (111, Fig. 3) further comprising an elongated core (115) with at least one strand of high strength yarn, wherein the core (115) has a total linear density in the range of about 400 to 4000 dtex, and wherein the at least one strand of a high strength yarn material is selected from the group consisting of polyester, liquid crystal polyester, polyamide, para-aramid, para-aramid copolymer, polyimide, polyphenylene-2,6-benzobisoxazole (PBO), polyketone (PK), polyetheretherketone (PEEK), glass, carbon, basalt, steel and blends thereof. (See at least Fig. 3 and its detailed description.) Since the high strength yarn is also configured to provide tensile strength to a tubular body similar to a cable with an outer jacket, one of ordinary skill in the art would have considered the invention disclosed in the ‘884 publication analogous to Johnson’s invention and further found it obvious to, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, perform routine experimentation using a polyester, glass, or basalt material to having a linear density of 400-2000 dtex to determine their suitability for use as the tensile strand of Johnson’s invention. The reason is the knit fabric yarns described in the ‘884 publication provide a high tensile strength with better fatigue resistance by limiting yarn-on-yarn abrasion.
Regarding claim 3, Johnson further teaches that the at least one tensile strand comprises three tensile strands (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, Johnson further teaches the optical element comprises a bare optical fiber or a tight-buffered optical fiber (col. 3, ll. 53-63).
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 0311941 A1 patent publication in view of the ‘884 publication.
Regarding claim 1, the ‘941 publication discloses a cable assembly, comprising: an optical fiber cable (10, Fig. 1), comprising: a cable jacket (sheath 20) having a length (longitudinal direction), an inner surface (facing inward), and an outer surface (facing outward), the inner surface defining a central bore (about an optical fiber 1) extending along a longitudinal axis of the optical fiber cable and the outer surface defining an outermost surface of the optical fiber cable (as illustrated in Fig. 1); at least one tensile strand (reinforcing metal strands 3) disposed between the inner surface and the outer surface of the cable jacket (as illustrated in Fig. 1), wherein the at least one tensile strand has a length that is substantially equal to or greater than the length of the cable jacket (strands 3 are inherently greater in length than the jacket); at least one optical element (the optical fiber 1) disposed within the central bore of the cable jacket.
The ‘941 publication does not specify a linear density of the at least one tensile strand, which is formed of a material selected from the group consisting of a glass, basalt, a polyester, an ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene, and a polymer having an elastic modulus of at least 30 GPa. The ‘884 publication discloses a tubular article (1, Fig. 1) comprising inner and outer tubes (10, 12, equivalent to a jacket), and a reinforcing layer (11) disposed between the inner and outer tubes, wherein the reinforcing layer (11) comprises a hybrid cord (111, Fig. 3) further comprising an elongated core (115) with at least one strand of high strength yarn, wherein the core (115) has a total linear density in the range of about 400 to 4000 dtex, and wherein the at least one strand of a high strength yarn material is selected from the group consisting of polyester, liquid crystal polyester, polyamide, para-aramid, para-aramid copolymer, polyimide, polyphenylene-2,6-benzobisoxazole (PBO), polyketone (PK), polyetheretherketone (PEEK), glass, carbon, basalt, steel and blends thereof. (See at least Fig. 3 and its detailed description.) Since the high strength yarn is also configured to provide tensile strength to a tubular body similar to a cable with an outer jacket, one of ordinary skill in the art would have considered the invention disclosed in the ‘884 publication analogous to that of the ‘941 publication and further found it obvious to, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, perform routine experimentation using a polyester, glass, or basalt material to having a linear density of 400-2000 dtex to determine their suitability for use as the tensile strand of in the ‘941 publication. The reason is the knit fabric yarns described in the ‘884 publication provide a high tensile strength with better fatigue resistance by limiting yarn-on-yarn abrasion.
Regarding claim 4, the ‘941 publication further discloses the outer surface of the cable jacket defines a maximum cross-sectional dimension of the optical fiber cable and wherein the maximum cross-sectional dimension is 5 mm or less (“ diameters of these cables are of the order of several millimeters”, with a specific example of 0.8 mm).
Regarding claim 6, the ‘941 publication further discloses the at least one optical element is a single optical fiber and wherein the inner surface of the cable jacket contacts the single optical fiber (as illustrated in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, the ‘941 publication further discloses each of the at least one tensile strand (3) comprises a maximum cross-sectional dimension of 0.05 mm to 0.2 mm (each strand 3 has a diameter between 0.06 mm and 0.5 mm, and preferably between 0.08 mm and 0.2 mm).
Claim(s) 1, 7, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PGPub 2013/0034659 A1 by Hager et al. in view of the ‘884 publication
Regarding claim 1, Hager teaches a cable assembly, comprising: an optical fiber cable (300), comprising: a cable jacket (HDPE sheath 306) having a length (longitudinal direction of the cable 300), an inner surface (facing inward), and an outer surface (facing outward), the inner surface defining a central bore (defined by an inner sheath 30) extending along a longitudinal axis of the optical fiber cable and the outer surface defining an outermost surface of the optical fiber cable (as illustrated in Figs. 5, 6); at least one tensile strand (low profile flexible reinforcement members 308 formed by a plurality of strand bundles 34) disposed between the inner surface and the outer surface of the cable jacket (as illustrated in Figs. 5, 6), wherein the at least one tensile strand has a length that is substantially equal to or greater than the length of the cable jacket (strands are inherently greater in length than the jacket); at least one optical element (optical fiber ribbon or bundle 304/312) disposed within the central bore of the cable jacket.
Hager does not specify a linear density of the at least one tensile strand, which is formed of a material selected from the group consisting of a glass, basalt, a polyester, an ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene, and a polymer having an elastic modulus of at least 30 GPa. The ‘884 publication discloses a tubular article (1, Fig. 1) comprising inner and outer tubes (10, 12, equivalent to a jacket), and a reinforcing layer (11) disposed between the inner and outer tubes, wherein the reinforcing layer (11) comprises a hybrid cord (111, Fig. 3) further comprising an elongated core (115) with at least one strand of high strength yarn, wherein the core (115) has a total linear density in the range of about 400 to 4000 dtex, and wherein the at least one strand of a high strength yarn material is selected from the group consisting of polyester, liquid crystal polyester, polyamide, para-aramid, para-aramid copolymer, polyimide, polyphenylene-2,6-benzobisoxazole (PBO), polyketone (PK), polyetheretherketone (PEEK), glass, carbon, basalt, steel and blends thereof. (See at least Fig. 3 and its detailed description.) Since the high strength yarn is also configured to provide tensile strength to a tubular body similar to a cable with an outer jacket, one of ordinary skill in the art would have considered the invention disclosed in the ‘884 publication analogous to Hager’s invention and further found it obvious to, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, perform routine experimentation using a polyester, glass, or basalt material to having a linear density of 400-2000 dtex to determine their suitability for use as the tensile strand of Hager’s invention. The reason is the knit fabric yarns described in the ‘884 publication provide a high tensile strength with better fatigue resistance by limiting yarn-on-yarn abrasion.
Regarding claims 7, 8, Hager further teaches each of the at least one tensile strand comprises a first cross-sectional dimension and a second cross-sectional dimension, wherein the first cross-sectional dimension is measured radially with respect to the longitudinal axis, wherein the second cross-sectional dimension is measured transversely to the first cross-sectional dimension, and wherein the second cross-sectional dimension is larger than the first cross-sectional dimension, wherein the second cross-sectional dimension is at least 1.25x the first cross-sectional dimension (the members 308 have a rectangular shape elongated in a direction transverse to the radial direction of the cable 300, with a dimensional ratio of 4.4 (2.20/0.5)).
Claim(s) 11, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson et al., the ‘941 publication, or Hager et al. in view of the ‘884 publication as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent 5,396,572 to Bradley et al.
Regarding claims 11, 12, the inventions of Johnson, the ‘941 publication, and Hager in view of the ‘884 publication each features the optical fiber cable having the tensile strand but does not further specify how the cable is adapted for an optical connector. Bradley teaches a first optical fiber connector (100, Figs. 1-3) attached to an end of optical cable (30) having filamentary strength members (33), wherein the first connector comprises: a connector housing (150) having a first end and a second end (with first and second cavities 151, 152), the first end configured to be inserted into (via a fiber ferrule 110) an optical receptacle (that receives optical connectors) and the second end comprising a sleeve (defining the second cavity 152); a crimp band (160) having a first ring section (163) and a second ring section (164); wherein the first ring section engages the sleeve of the connector housing (at ribs 156) and the second ring section engages (via ribs 161) the optical fiber cable; and wherein the at least one optical element (optical fiber 21) extends through the connector housing from the first end to the second end (as illustrated in Fig. 3), and wherein the cable jacket having the at least one tensile strand embedded therein is compressed between the second ring section (164) of the crimp band and a crimp ring (a sheath tube 180), as illustrated in Figs. 2, 3. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the optical cable inventions of Johnson et al., the ‘941 publication, or Hager et al., by terminating the cables with the optical connector, in part by using the crimp sleeve (160) and the sheath tube (180), which combine to protect the optical fibers within the cable from axial forces applied to the optical cable during crimping operation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) pending have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. DE 202006018227 U1 discloses a cable with a glass filament consisting of a basalt yarn with a 1610 Dtex.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLIE PENG whose telephone number is (571)272-2177. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 6PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Hollweg can be reached at (571)270-1739. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHARLIE Y PENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights