DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 06/05/2024 and 09/19/2024 have all been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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.
Claims 1-6 & 10-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierce et al. (US20100202748 A1) in view of Weber et al. (US4684211 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Pierce et al. discloses an installation grip for a fiber optic cable, the fiber optic cable (100) comprising:
an outer jacket (150)
a plurality of optical fibers within the outer jacket (paragraph 0094)
at least one strength member extending along the length of the fiber optic cable (130/140)
a ferrule terminating the plurality of optical fibers (paragraph 0051)
an installation grip comprising:
a tubular body having a proximal end, a distal end, and an internal cavity configured to receive the ferrule (600)
a pulling plug at the proximal end of the tubular body for connection to a tension member (330)
Pierce et al. further discloses that the routing of the fiber optic cable along the pathway causes a tensile load to be imposed on the installation grip, and the installation grip transfers the tensile load to the at least one strength member along a load path that bypasses the ferrule (paragraph 0100). However, Pierce et al. does not expressly disclose that the tubular body includes at least one slot adjacent the distal end that is configured to receive the at least one strength member of the fiber optic cable such that a tensile load imposed on the installation grip when pulling the cable along is transferred to the at least one strength member along a load path that bypasses the ferrule. Weber et al. expressly discloses a pulling grip for fiber optic cable comprising a tubular body including at least one slot adjacent the distal end that is configured to receive the at least one strength member of the fiber optic cable such that a tensile load imposed on the installation grip when pulling the cable along is transferred to the at least one strength member along a load path that bypasses the ferrule (Col. 2 55-60; Col. 3 30-40; Figs. 2, 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the installation grip of Pierce et al. to incorporate the slot-based strength member of Weber et al. to provide a compact, low-profile means of securing the strength member to the tubular body without increasing the radial cross-section.
Regarding Claim 2, Pierce et al. further discloses that the installation grip comprises a first half shell defining a first cavity portion (310) and a second half shell defining a second cavity portion (910) (paragraph 0101), wherein the first and second half shells are configured to be coupled together to form the installation grip and wherein when coupled together the first and second cavity portions define the internal cavity (160) (paragraphs 0036, 0101)
Regarding Claim 3, Pierce et al. discloses that the first half shell (310) includes at least one first slot portion and the second half shell (910) when coupled together, define the internal cavity and complete the tubular body at the distal end. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, that incorporating the slot geometry of Weber et al. into the installation grip body of Pierce et al. results in each half shell necessarily contributing a respective slot portion at the distal end, such that the at least one slot is defined by mating the first and second half shells.
Regarding Claim 4, Pierce et al. in view of Weber et a. teach all the limitations of the parent claim. Pierce et al. further discloses a plurality of connecting pins arranged on opposite lateral sides of the body (320A/320B/320C/320D). When the slot geometry of Weber et al. is incorporated into the grip body of Pierce et al., the first and second half shells each contribute a pair of slot portions at the distal end, defining a pair of slots. The paired slot arrangement would have been an obvious and predictable consequence of modifying the grip body of Pierce et al. with the slot geometry of Weber et al.
Regarding Claim 5, Pierce et al. in view of Weber et al. teach all the limitations of the parent claim. Pierce et al. further expressly discloses that the connecting pins are on opposed sides of the installation grip (paragraphs 0039, 0103; Figs. 3, 9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, when incorporating the slot geometry of Weber et al. into the body of Pierce et al., the symmetric arrangement naturally results in the pair of slots being disposed on opposite sides of the grip.
Regarding Claim 6, Pierce et al. in view of Weber et al. teach all the limitations of the parent claim. Pierce et al. further teaches that the installation grip further includes at least one latch for securing the first half and second half shell together, wherein the at least one latch includes at least one spring clip (paragraphs 0054, 0061-0062, 0101-0103; 320A-D, 920A-D).
Regarding Claim 10, Pierce et al. discloses a fiber optic cable assembly comprising:
a fiber optic cable (100) comprising:
an outer jacket (150)
a plurality of optical fibers within the outer jacket (paragraph 0094)
at least one strength member extending along the length of the fiber optic cable (130/140)
a ferrule terminating the plurality of optical fibers (paragraph 0051)
an installation grip for routing the fiber optic cable assembly along ductwork at an installation site comprising:
a tubular body having a proximal end, a distal end, and an internal cavity configured to receive the ferrule (600)
a pulling plug at the proximal end of the tubular body for connection to a tension member (330)
Pierce et al. further discloses that the routing of the fiber optic cable along the pathway causes a tensile load to be imposed on the installation grip, and the installation grip transfers the tensile load to the at least one strength member along a load path that bypasses the ferrule (paragraph 0100). However, Pierce et al. does not expressly disclose that the tubular body includes at least one slot adjacent the distal end that is configured to receive the at least one strength member of the fiber optic cable such that a tensile load imposed on the installation grip when pulling the cable along is transferred to the at least one strength member along a load path that bypasses the ferrule. Weber et al. expressly discloses a pulling grip for fiber optic cable comprising a tubular body including at least one slot adjacent the distal end that is configured to receive the at least one strength member of the fiber optic cable such that a tensile load imposed on the installation grip when pulling the cable along is transferred to the at least one strength member along a load path that bypasses the ferrule (Col. 2 55-60; Col. 3 30-40; Figs. 2, 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the installation grip of Pierce et al. to incorporate the slot-based strength member of Weber et al. to provide a compact, low-profile means of securing the strength member to the tubular body without increasing the radial cross-section.
Regarding Claim 11, Pierce et al. further teaches that the ferrule is part of a connector sub-assembly (160) that further includes a ferrule push component, wherein the connector sub-assembly is configured to be assembled with a connector housing when not encased by the installation grip to form a fiber optic connector (paragraph 0050). Pierce et al. further teaches that the internal cavity of the installation grip defines a shape that substantially matches the shape of the connector sub-assembly to limit movement relative to the installation grip (paragraphs 0028-0032, 0121, 0127; Figs. 8-9).
Regarding Claim 12, Pierce et al. discloses that the outer jacket of the fiber optic cable extends into the installation grip and the at least one slot (710) in the tubular body is disposed between an end of the outer jacket (paragraph 0118; Fig. 7).
Regarding Claim 13, Pierce et al. further discloses that the installation grip comprises a first half shell defining a first cavity portion (310) and a second half shell defining a second cavity portion (910) (paragraph 0101), wherein the first and second half shells are configured to be coupled together to form the installation grip and wherein when coupled together the first and second cavity portions define the internal cavity (160; paragraphs 0036, 0101).
Regarding Claim 14, Pierce et al. teaches that the first half shell includes at least one first slot portion and the second half shell includes at least one second slot portion, and when the first and second half shell are coupled together the at least one first and second slot portion define the at least one slot (310/910; paragraphs 0101, 0114).
Regarding Claim 15, Pierce et al. disclose a method of handling a fiber optic cable for installation at an installation site, the fiber optic cable (100) comprising:
an outer jacket (150)
a plurality of optical fibers within the outer jacket (paragraph 0094)
at least one strength member extending along the length of the fiber optic cable (130/140)
a ferrule terminating the plurality of optical fibers (paragraph 0051)
the method comprising:
encasing the ferrule in an installation grip (paragraph 0058)
Pierce et al. further discloses the routing of the fiber optic cable along the pathway causes a tensile load to be imposed on the installation grip, and the installation grip transfers the tensile load to the at least one strength member along a load path that bypasses the ferrule (paragraph 0100). However, Pierce et al. does not expressly disclose the step of coupling the at least one strength member from the fiber optic cable to the installation grip by passing the at least one strength member through at least one slot in the tubular body, and causing a tensile load imposed on the installation grip to be transferred to the at least one strength member along a load path that bypasses the ferrule. Weber et al. expressly discloses this coupling step, where the strength members pass through the at least one slot, in a manner such that all tensile load transfers to the strength member and bypasses the ferrule within the cavity (Col. 2 55-60; Col. 3 30-40; Figs. 2, 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate the coupling method of Weber et al. into the method of Pierce et al. as a known strength member anchoring technique to achieve predictable results of a compact, reliable bypass load path during installation.
Regarding Claim 16, Pierce et al. discloses encasing the ferrule in the installation grip by placing the ferrule in a cavity portion of one of the first half shell and the second half shell and coupling the first half shell to the second half shell to encase the ferrule in the installation grip (paragraphs 0063-0094).
Regarding Claim 17, Pierce et al. expressly discloses securing the first half shell to the second half shell using the at least one spring clip (paragraphs 0042, 0054, 0061-0062).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierce et al. (US20100202748 A1) in view of Weber et al. (US4684211 A) in further view of Cox et al. (US 20160147023 A1) and Smith et al. (US8630523 B2).
Regarding Claim 7, Pierce et al. and Weber et al. teach all the limitations of the parent claim. Neither reference expressly discloses a retention groove adjacent to the distal end of the tubular body. Cox et al. expressly discloses a retention groove (31/36) configured to receive a clamp for fixing the strength member to the tubular body (paragraphs 0038-0039, 0047-0049; Claims 27, 29, 31; Figs. 3, 8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate this retention groove arrangement into the installation grip of Piece et al. and Weber et al. in order to provide a secure and reliable mechanism for anchoring the strength member to the grip body during installation.
Regarding Claim 8, Pierce et al., Weber et al., and Cox et al. teach all the limitations of the parent claim. Smith et al. further discloses that the installation grip further includes a clamp for fixing a strength member to the installation grip including a heat shrink tube to contract the tube to its contracted position and clamp the strength member to the grip (Col. 5-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to implement the clamp in the installation grip of Pierce et al. modified by Weber and Cox et al. with heat shrink material as taught by Smith et al. in order to provide a simple, reliable and tool-free mechanism for securing the strength member within the retention groove of the installation grip.
Claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierce et al. (US20100202748 A1), in view of Weber et al. (US4684211 A) and Gniadek (US20160266326 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Pierce et al. and Weber et al. disclose all the limitations of the parent claim. However, neither reference expressly discloses that the internal cavity includes a rotational stop cavity configured to receive at least one rotational stop on the fiber optic cable. Gniadek expressly discloses a fiber optic connector cavity configured to receive a corresponding surface of an insert within the cavity and to inhibit rotation of the insert relative to the cavity (paragraphs 0007, 0067). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate an anti-rotation feature into the internal cavity of the installation grip of Pierce et al. as taught by Gniadek to limit rotation of the installation grip relative to the fiber optic cable.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierce et al. (US20100202748 A1) in view of Weber et al. (US4684211 A), in further view of Bowes (US4319802 A).
Regarding Claim 18, Pierce et al. and Weber et al. teach all the limitations of the parent claim. Neither reference expressly disclose the step of inserting the at least one strength member through a slot in the installation grip and fixing the at least one strength member to the grip. Bowes expressly discloses coupling the at least one strength member from the fiber optic cable to the installation grip by inserting the at least one strength member (56) of the fiber optic cable through a slot (42) in the installation grip and fixing the at least one strength member to the installation grip (Col. 8; Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate the slot-insertion and fixing steps of Bowes into the method of Pierce et al. and Weber et al. in order to provide a defined, repeatable process for securing the strength member within the installation grip.
Regarding Claim 19, Bowes further discloses that fixing the at least one strength member to the installation grip includes clamping the at least one strength member to the installation grip (Col. 8-9).
Regarding Claim 20, Pierce et al., Weber et al., and Bowes teach all the limitations of Claim 18. Pierce et al. further discloses applying a pulling tension to the tension member in order to route the fiber optic cable along the ductwork (paragraph 0055). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to employ either or both tension-member pulling and air-assist methods as a routine design choice based on installation site conditions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NASIM KAIRI COOPER whose telephone number is (571)272-9685. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00.
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 5712701739. 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.
/NASIM KAIRI COOPER/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights