CTNF 18/486,233 CTNF 77830 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions 08-25-01 AIA Applicant’s election without traverse of species I, claims 1-7 and 9-16 , in the reply filed on 4/7/26 is acknowledged. Information Disclosure Statement 3. The prior art documents submitted by applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 10/13/23 and 04/22/26, have all been considered and made of record (note the attached copy of form PTO/SB/08a). Specification 4. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 5. 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 6. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA 7. Claim s 10-11 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Cody et al. (US-7693374-B2) . With respect to claim 10, Cody et al. (figure 1) disclose an optical fiber cable comprising: a protective tube (cable jacket) defining an internal space (figure 1); and optical fibers (OF) bundled each other in the internal space (figure 1), wherein the protective tube includes a first portion having a first cut (see figure 1) and a second portion having a second cut (figure 1) corresponding to the first cut (figure 1), the second portion being spaced from the first portion (figure 1), and wherein an end of a first optical fiber (OF) included in the optical fibers is extracted to outside of the protective tube (cable jacket) from between the first portion and the second portion (see figure 1). With respect to claim 11, Cody et al. disclose the optical fiber cable, wherein at least part of the optical fibers are ribbonized or intermittently ribbonized (column 2, lines 65-66). With respect to claim 15, Cody et al. (figure 6e) disclose the optical fiber cable, further comprising a second protective tube (62), wherein at least part of a portion of the first optical fiber (32), the portion being exposed from the protective tube (cable jacket), is covered by the second protective tube (62). With respect to claim 16, Cody et al. (figures 19a and 19e) disclose the optical fiber cable, further comprising a first connector (a connector, a receptacle or a ferrule 196) connected to one end of each of the optical fibers; and a second connector (194a) connected to the end of the first optical fiber (figure 19e). [AltContent: arrow] Internal space [AltContent: arrow] [AltContent: arrow] [AltContent: arrow] [AltContent: ] PNG media_image1.png 188 434 media_image1.png Greyscale First cut Second cut A first cylindrical portion (a first portion) A second cylindrical portion (a second portion) Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 8. 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 9. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-20-aia AIA 10. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) 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. 07-21 AIA 11. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cody et al. (as cited above) . With respect to claim 14, Cody et al. su bstantially disclose all the limitations of the claimed invention except the optical fibers occupy from 10% to 60% of a cross- sectional area of the internal space in terms of proportion. However, the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F. 2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Therefore, 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 device of Cody to form the optical fibers occupy from 10% to 60% of a cross- sectional area of the internal space in terms of proportion as claimed, because the dimensions can be varied depending upon the device in a particular application . 07-21 AIA 12. Claim s 1-7, 9 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cody et al. (as cited above) in view of Gartside, III et al. (US-4826278-A) . With respect to claim 1, Cody et al. (figure 1) disclose an optical fiber cable comprising an optical fiber bundle (figure 1) including optical fibers (OF); and a protective member (cable jacket) having a cylindrical shape (see figure 1) and defining an internal space (figure 1) where the optical fiber bundle is accommodated (figure 1), wherein the protective member (cable jacket) includes a first cylindrical portion having a ring-shaped first cut (see figure 1) and a second cylindrical portion having a second cut (figure 1) corresponding to the first cut (figure 1), the second cylindrical portion being spaced from the first cylindrical portion (see figure 1), and wherein an end of a first optical fiber (OF) included in the optical fibers is pulled out to outside of the protective member (cable jacket) from between the first cylindrical portion and the second cylindrical portion (see figure 1). Cody et al. do not explicitly disclose the optical fiber bundle being a single optical fiber bundle is accommodated in the internal space. However, Gartside, III et al. (figures 6 and 8) teach a fiber optic device including the optical fiber bundle (22, figures 6 and 8) being a single optical fiber bundle (figure 8) is accommodated in the internal space (figure 8). Therefore, 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 device of Cody et al. to include the above features (accordance with the teaching of Gartside, III) for the purpose of providing the optical fibers being assembled together without an intentional stranding lay (column 11, lines 5-7). With respect to claim 2, Cody et al. disclose the optical fiber cable, wherein the optical fiber bundle includes at least one of a ribbon fiber and an intermittent ribbon fiber, the ribbon fiber including at least part of the optical fibers, the intermittent ribbon fiber including at least part of the optical fibers (column 2, line65- column 3, line 10). With respect to claims 3 and 12, Cody et al. su bstantially disclose all the limitations of the claimed invention except the optical fiber bundle includes a binding member configured to bundle the optical fibers together. However, Gartside, III et al. (figure 8) teach a fiber optic device including the optical fiber bundle (22) includes a binding member (138) configured to bundle the optical fibers together (figure 8). Therefore, 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 device of Cody et al. to include the above features (accordance with the teaching of Gartside, III) for the purpose of providing the optical fibers being assembled together without an intentional stranding lay (column 11, lines 5-7). With respect to claims 4 and 13, Cody et al. su bstantially disclose all the limitations of the claimed invention except the optical fiber bundle occupies 60% or less of a cross- sectional area of the internal space in terms of proportion. However, Gartside, III et al. (figure 8) teach a fiber optic device including the optical fiber bundle (22) occupies 60% or less of a cross- sectional area of the internal space in terms of proportion (figure 8). Therefore, 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 device of Cody et al. to include the above features (accordance with the teaching of Gartside, III) for the purpose of providing the optical fibers being assembled together without an intentional stranding lay (column 11, lines 5-7). With respect to claim 5, Cody et al. su bstantially disclose all the limitations of the claimed invention except the optical fiber bundle occupies from 10% to 60% of a cross-sectional area of the internal space in terms of proportion. However, the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F. 2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Therefore, 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 device of Cody to form the optical fibers occupy from 10% to 60% of a cross- sectional area of the internal space in terms of proportion as claimed, because the dimensions can be varied depending upon the device in a particular application. With respect to claim 6, Cody et al. (figure 6e) disclose the optical fiber cable, further comprising a protective tube (62), wherein at least part of a portion of the first optical fiber (32), the portion being exposed from the protective member (cable jacket), is covered by the protective tube (62). With respect to claim 7, Cody et al. (figures 19a and 19e) disclose the optical fiber cable, further comprising a first connector (a connector, a receptacle or a ferrule 196) connected to one end of each of the optical fibers; and a second connector (194a) connected to the end of the first optical fiber (figure 19e). With respect to claim 9, Cody et al. disclose an optical communication system comprising: a server rack group including server racks; a distribution frame; and the optical fiber cable connecting the server rack group and the distribution frame (column 1, lines 18-24) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA 13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cooke et al. (US-20220404574 A1) disclose preconnectorized cable assemblies. Lail (US-20010007604-A1) discloses a fiber optic cable. Frye et al. (US-9329354-B2) disclose an optical fiber branch distribution cable . 14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer Doan whose telephone number is (571) 272-2346. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 7:00am to 3:30pm. 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 on 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. /JENNIFER DOAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/486,233 Page 2 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/486,233 Page 3 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/486,233 Page 4 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/486,233 Page 5 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/486,233 Page 6 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/486,233 Page 7 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/486,233 Page 8 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/486,233 Page 9 Art Unit: 2874
Prosecution Insights