DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on September 25, 2025 has been entered.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 7-8, “that covers all of the inner holes the first …” is grammatically incorrect. It appears “at” is missing before “the first”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites a first tip seal and second tip seal. The embodiment recited in claim 1 appears to refer to figure 6, as indicated by applicant’s remarks filed September 25, 2025. In the embodiment disclosed in figure 6, a single tip seal is provided for at the second end of the cladding glass body, indicated as 17 (see page 6 of applicant’s response). The specification further recites openings at both ends of the cladding body are sealed by a dummy rod integration step (at the first end) and a tip sealing step (at the second end), wherein tip sealing involves reducing the diameter of the second end portion to form a tapered tip, as shown in figure 6. Also shown in figure 6 is the lack of a first tip seal, since the step of tip sealing was not performed on the first end. Thus, the first end does not have any narrowing or a tip, and therefore lack a tip seal. Accordingly, it does not appear the specification has support for an optical fiber preform with a first and a second tip seals, and a single dummy rod having an outer diameter fixed to the first end of the cladding body and covering all of the inner holes.
Claim 3 recites accommodating silica powder in the inner holes in a quantity that fills an entirety of the inner holes. Claim 3 depends from claim 1 which recites glass rods are accommodated in the inner holes. The specification does not appear to offer support for this embodiment comprising a plurality of inner holes, each filled with a glass rod and silica powder.
Claim 10 recites a first tip seal and second tip seal. The embodiment recited in claim 10 appears to refer to figure 32, as indicated by applicant’s remarks filed September 25, 2025. In the embodiment disclosed in figure 32, a single tip seal is provided for at the second end of the cladding glass body, indicated as 17 (see page 10 of applicant’s response). The specification further recites openings at both ends of the cladding body are sealed by a dummy rod integration step (at the first end) and a tip sealing step (at the second end), wherein tip sealing involves reducing the diameter of the second end portion to form a tapered tip, as shown in figure 32. Also shown in figure 32 is the lack of a first tip seal, since the step of tip sealing was not performed on the first end. Thus, the first end does not have any narrowing or a tip, and therefore lack a tip seal. Accordingly, it does not appear the specification has support for an optical fiber preform with a first and a second tip seals, and a single dummy rod integrated with a connecting glass tube.
Claim 10 also recites a single dummy silica rod fixed to the first end of the cladding glass body. Applicant notes the embodiment disclosed in claim 10 is depicted by figure 32. In this embodiment the single dummy silica rod abuts the cladding glass body and is fixed to the connecting glass tube (see [0306]-[0307] of the PGPub). Accordingly, the specification does not appear to offer support for the feature of a dummy silica rod is fixed to the cladding glass body.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The wherein clause of claim 1 recites a first tip seal that closes a first end of the inner holes, which is already recited in the limitation regarding the dummy silica rod. It also recites the first tip seals includes the single dummy silica rod, which suggests the first tip seal is the same as the single dummy rod. Thus, it is unclear if the tip seal is something different from the single dummy rod.
In further regards to claim 1, a wherein clause is usually used to further define an already described element. Since a first tip seal is being recited for the first time in a wherein clause and no particular action is associated with the first tip seal, it is unclear if it is a required part of the optical fiber preform.
Claims 2-8 are also indefinite by virtue of their dependencies on claim 1.
The wherein clause of claim 10 recites a first tip seal that includes the single dummy silica rod and the connecting glass tube, which suggests the first tip seal is the same as the single dummy rod integrated with the connecting glass tube. Thus, it is unclear if the tip seal is something different from the integrated single dummy rod and connecting glass tube.
In further regards to claim 10, a wherein clause is usually used to further define an already described element. Since a first tip seal is being recited for the first time in a wherein clause and no particular action is associated with the first tip seal, it is unclear if it is a required part of the optical fiber preform.
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagashima et al. (2018/0244557) in view of Roba et al. (5,584,808) and Gonda et al. (2016/0075590). Nagashima disclose a multicore optical fiber preform comprising a cladding body that is a cladding of an optical fiber, is cylindrical, and comprises inner holes along an axial direction ([0019], figures 1-6), glass rods that are cores of the optical fiber, and that are each accommodated in a respective one of the inner holes ([0027], figure 4), and a connecting glass tube fixed to a first end of the cladding glass body ([0024], figure 3). Nagashima further teaches providing a second tip seal in a second end of the cladding glass body, which closes a second end of the inner holes at the second end of the cladding glass body ([0029], figure 5). Nagashima teaches the second seal tip allows for the sealing of the second end of the preform to allow depressurization of inner holes while drawing the preform ([0030]). Roba also teaches inserting a core rod into an inner hole of a cladding body (col. 5 lines 38-41). In a similar fashion to Nagashima, Roba also provides a tip seal to a second end of the cladding body that closes a second end of the inner hole of the cladding glass body (col. 7 lines 28-33). Roba also depressurizes the inner hole and provides for a first tip seal at a first end of the cladding body that closes a first end of the cladding glass body (col. 7 lines 65-67, col. 8 lines 1, 34-45). Roba teaches the first tip seal is provided for by fixing a connecting glass tube to a first end of the cladding glass body and integrating the connecting glass tube with a single dummy silica rod that is accommodated inside of the connecting glass tube (figure 6), wherein the dummy silica rod serves as a handle for the preform (col. 5 lines 41-43). Roba teaches providing for tip seals at both ends of the cladding tube provides for a preform with the hole in an evacuated condition, making it ready for drawing into an optical fiber (col. 8 lines 43-45, col. 9 lines 49-42). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have provided for a first tip seal by integrating the connecting glass tube to a single dummy silica rod accommodated inside the connecting glass tube, in addition to the second tip seal of Nagashima, so as to provide a preform with evacuated inner holes, that is ready for drawing. Although Roba teaches a single inner hole with a single core rod, the adaptation of Roba can be effected with a teaching by Gonda. Gonda teaches a multicore optical fiber preform comprising an arrangement of multiple core rods ([0043]-[0045]). While the cladding for the multicore optical fiber preform is provided for in a different manner from that of Nagashima, Gonda teaches the assembly of core rods comprises a central core rod that is attached to single dummy silica rod that extends beyond the other core rod (see figures 4B and 4C). Gonda teaches the central dummy rod allows for easier handling of the optical fiber preform as the preform can be held by holding only the central dummy rod ([0053]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have gather from the combined teachings of Roba and Gonda to provide for a plurality of core rods, wherein the central core rod has a single dummy glass rod that is longer, thereby allowing for a first tip seal to be formed and easier handling of the optical fiber preform, as taught by Roba and Gonda.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed September 25, 2025, with respect to claims 1 and 10 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUEENIE S DEHGHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8209. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:30.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on 571-270-7001. 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.
/QUEENIE S DEHGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741