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, 4, 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PGPub 2020/0012063 A1 by Lambert et al. in view of U.S. PGPub 2014/0133806 A1 by Hill et al. and further in view of WO 2018/146470 A1 patent publication by Kirkpatrick.
Regarding claim 1, Lambert teaches a system for deploying optical fiber through a first fiber tube having a first end and an opposite second end, the system comprising: an optical fiber (900) having a ferrulized end (termination piece 110) at which a ferrule assembly (ferrule sub assembly 100) is secured, the ferrulized end being configured to be routed through (Fig. 5) the first fiber tube (800) in a direction from the first end to the second end of the fiber tube (e.g., left to right in Fig. 5), the ferrule assembly being adapted to be incorporated as part of a fiber optic connector (whose assembled form shown in Fig. 7) after having been routed through the first tube; the fiber optic connector including a connector body (including a housing 210 and a shroud 220, Fig. 6) having a front end and a rear end (right and left ends, respectively, in Fig. 6), the fiber optic connector including a second fiber tube (SC rear body 200) that projects rearwardly (Figs. 6, 7) from the rear end of the connector body, the second fiber tube including a front end anchored with respect to the connector body (housing 210 is connected or fixed to the SC rear body 200 such that it surrounds the SC rear body 200, ¶[0053]) and a rear end positioned rearward of the rear end of the connector body (as shown in Fig. 7, in which a rear portion of the body 200 including ribs or ridges 211 extends beyond the shroud 220), the ferrulized end of the optical fiber being insertable through the second fiber tube and the connector body in a forward direction extending from the rear end of the connector body toward the front end of the connector body (Fig. 6), the ferrule assembly being mountable adjacent the front end of the connector body upon insertion of the ferrule assembly forwardly through the second fiber tube and the connector body (exterior of the ferrule assembly 100 and interior of the second tube 200 have matching asymmetric D profiles for the purpose of receiving and aligning a ferrule holder 120 in the second tube 200, ¶[0052]); and a tube coupler (a flexible tube oversleeving the tubes 200 and 800, not illustrated but described in ¶[0055]) for coupling the second end of the first fiber tube to the rear end of the second fiber tube after the ferrulized end of the optical fiber has been inserted through the second fiber tube.
Lambert does not teach the second fiber tube (200) including a front end sealed with the connector body (i.e., to an interior of the SC connector housing 210 to which the second tube 200 is connected). Hill also teaches an SC fiber optic connector (108) comprising a cover (168, equivalent to shroud 220 in Lambert), an inner housing (166, equivalent to housing 210 in Lambert), a sealing grommet (176) preinstalled in a channel (178) inside the housing (166) for receiving an optical fiber cable (175) pre-connectorized with a ferrule tip. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lambert’s invention, by using a sealing grommet or its equivalent, in the interior of the housing (210) to seal against any part being inserted into or disposed inside the housing, e.g., the second tube (200), as suggested by Hill, so as to prevent water or moisture that may be present on the exterior of the cable or the connector, from entering the connector and subsequently the adapter or housing into which the connector is plugged and from damaging optical components therein.
Lambert further does not teach the first and second fiber tubes are blow fiber tubes, i.e., a tube through which optical fibers a blown by a gas or fluid. Kirkpatrick teaches a fiber installation process of a pre-terminated optical fiber cable assembly (10), which includes a ferrule connector (24) that leads optical fiber or fibers (46), i.e., ferrulized fiber or fibers, through a duct (20), wherein a coupler (hollow connector 32) is coupling a trailing end of the duct (20) to a capping sleeve (40) that locally compresses the cable assembly (10) (equivalent to a flexible tube over-sleeve the tubes 800, 200 in Lambert’s invention, see Lambert ¶[0055]), and wherein the cable assembly is installed by inserting the a leading end of the cable (10) into the duct (20) and using a blowing machine (22) coupled to a leading end (23) of the duct (20) to propel the cable through the duct using drag force. Kirkpatrick therefore render it obvious to installed a ferrulized or pre-terminated optical cable through a blow tube and doing so has various known advantages in the art, including eliminating the need to splicing or termination by a technician in the field and/or minimize damage to the optical fiber or cable (blowing over other installation methods such us pulling). It thus would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lambert’s invention, by using the blowing method to install the optical fiber by passing the ferrulized optical fiber through the first and second fiber tubes over-sleeved with the flexible tube, using the blowing method, as suggested by Kirkpatrick, for the same reason and advantage.
Regarding claim 4, while Lambert does not specify the state of connection between the second tube (200) and the connector body (210), Official notice is taken that having the second fiber tube factory pre-installed to the connector body prior to the fiber optic connector being used in the field would have been an obvious engineering choice to one skilled in the art, so as to simplify installation in the field.
Regarding claims 9, 10, Lambert further teaches that the diameter of a ferrule holder (120) of the ferrule assembly (100) is 3 mm and should be a maximum of 85% of the inner diameter of the installation tube (first fiber tube 800) through which it passes. The sizing of the tubes (800, 200) are therefore related to the outer diameter of the ferrule holder (120), and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to perform routine experimentation to determine optimal or appropriate ranges of inner and outer diameter for the tubes (800, 200), so as to enable an air cushion to be created diametrically around the fibre optic ferrule sub assembly (100) when installation air pressure is applied in the blowing process, while maintaining a reasonable maximum overall size of the tubes to limit the size, weight and material cost for manufacturing the entire connector.
Regarding claim 12, Lambert further teaches the tube coupler co-axially connects the first and second fiber tubes together in a sealed manner (an inherent function of a flexible over-sleeve tube).
Regarding claim 13, Lambert further teaches the ferrule assembly includes a ferrule (110) in which the ferrulized end of the optical fiber is adhesively secured, a ferrule hub (120) being mounted to the ferrule, and a ferrule spring (130) being positioned behind the ferrule hub.
Regarding claim 14, Lambert further teaches the ferrule (110, Fig. 2) includes a front (right) end and a rear (left) end, and wherein the hub is mounted at the rear end of the ferrule, and wherein the front end of the ferrule includes a front-end face at which the optical fiber terminates (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 15, it would have been a routine engineering choice for one of ordinary skill in the art to select the dimensions of ferrule based on its intended applications, i.e., types of fibers the ferrule encloses and/or types of connector in which the ferrule is disposed. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955)
Regarding claim 16, Lambert further teaches an outer shroud (220) that mounts over the connector body.
Claim(s) 2, 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lambert et al. and Hill et al. and Kirkpatrick as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. PGPub 2012/0328249 by Hernandez Quintana et al.
Regarding claims 2, 3, Lambert teaches fixing the housing (210) and the second tube (200) but not using adhesive or a heat shrink tube. Hernandez Quintana teaches (Fig. 7) using cushioning member the cushioning member 30 is attached to an fiber optic cable 12, specifically, a crimp band 32, a boot 36, a spring push 40 and spring 40 threaded over a portion of fiber optic cable 12, wherein the crimp band 32 has a stepped profile with a first portion 32a of the crimp band being secured to the fiber optic cable and a second portion 32b of the crimp band being secured to a portion of the fiber optic connector 34, and wherein cushioning member 30 may be a heat-shrink material, a slip-fit covering, a polymer-based sleeve, a rubber-based sleeve, or other suitable structure, and wherein the heat shrink cushioning member 30 may be glued-lined and/or have flame-retardant properties if desired. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lambert’s invention, to connect the optical fiber (900) and the second tube (200) disposed over and end of the optical fiber to the connector housing (200), by using a heat shrink cushioning member having an adhesive or glue-lined interior surface, as suggested by Hernandez Quintana, for the purpose of distributing forces over a larger surface area so that optical performance may be preserved.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Lambert is the closest identified prior art to the claimed invention and would have not anticipated or rendered obvious a modification of cutting the second optical fiber tube since the SC rear portion (200) is machined with ribs/ridges (211) for connecting to the installation tube (800), and such modification could destroy an intended function of Lambert’s invention.
Claims 17, 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Lambert is the closest identified prior art to the claimed invention but Lambert or any analogous prior art fails to further teach or suggest a rear spring stop that mounts in the connector body, wherein the rear spring stop includes retaining arms that flex between a retaining position and a ferrule assembly pass-through position, wherein when the retaining arms are in the ferrule assembly pass-through position the ferrule assembly can pass forwardly through retaining arms, and wherein when the retaining arms are in the spring retaining position the retaining arms are adapted to oppose a rear end of the ferrule spring to prevent rearward movement of a rear end of the ferrule spring, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Claim 19 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Lambert is the closest identified prior art to the claimed invention but Lambert or any analogous prior art fails to further teach or suggest a rear spring stop that mounts in a core housing of the connector body, wherein the rear spring stop includes an open side extending throughout a length of the rear spring stop for allowing the ferrule assembly to be routed around a stop surface of the rear spring stop while the spring stop is mounted within the core housing and then moved laterally in front of the stop surface of the rear spring stop after the ferrule and ferrule spring have been moved forwardly past the stop surface such that the stop surface opposes a rear end of the ferrule spring to prevent rearward movement of the rear end of the ferrule spring, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Claims 20-24 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Lambert is the closest identified prior art to the claimed invention but Lambert or any analogous prior art fails to further teach or suggest a rear spring stop that includes retaining arms that flex between a spring retaining position and a ferrule assembly pass- through position, wherein when the retaining arms are in the ferrule assembly pass-through position the ferrule assembly can pass forwardly through the retaining arms, and wherein when the retaining arms are in the spring retaining position the retaining arms are adapted to oppose a rear end of the ferrule spring to prevent rearward movement of the rear end of the ferrule spring, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Claims 25, 26 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Lambert is the closest identified prior art to the claimed invention but Lambert or any analogous prior art fails to further teach or suggest a rear spring stop carried with the connector body that is laterally slidable relative to the connector body between a retaining position and a ferrule assembly pass-through position, wherein when the rear spring stop is in the ferrule assembly pass-through position the ferrule assembly can pass forwardly past the rear spring stop, and wherein when the rear spring stop is in the spring retaining position the rear spring stop is adapted to oppose a rear end of the ferrule spring to prevent rearward movement of the rear end of the ferrule spring, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Claims 27-36 are allowed. Lambert is the closest identified prior art to the claimed invention but Lambert or any analogous prior art fails to further teach or suggest wherein the connector body includes a front housing that defines the front end of the connector body and a core housing that defines the rear end of the connector body, wherein the fiber optic connector includes a rear spring stop at the core housing, and wherein upon assembly the ferrule assembly is captured between the front housing and the rear spring stop, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Claims 43, 44 are allowed. Lambert is the closest identified prior art to the claimed invention but Lambert or any analogous prior art fails to further teach or suggest a rear spring stop that mounts in the connector body, wherein the rear spring stop includes retaining arms that flex between a retaining position and a ferrule assembly pass-through position, wherein when the retaining arms are in the ferrule assembly pass-through position the ferrule assembly can pass forwardly through retaining arms, and wherein when the retaining arms are in the spring retaining position the retaining arms are adapted to oppose a rear end of the ferrule spring to prevent rearward movement of a rear end of the ferrule spring, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Claim 45 is allowed. Lambert is the closest identified prior art to the claimed invention but Lambert or any analogous prior art fails to further teach or suggest a rear spring stop that mounts in a core housing of the connector body, wherein the rear spring stop includes an open side extending throughout a length of the rear spring stop for allowing the ferrule assembly to be routed around a stop surface of the rear spring stop while the spring stop is mounted within the core housing and then moved laterally in front of the stop surface of the rear spring stop after the ferrule and ferrule spring have been moved forwardly past the stop surface such that the stop surface opposes a rear end of the ferrule spring to prevent rearward movement of the rear end of the ferrule spring, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Claims 46-50 are allowed. Lambert is the closest identified prior art to the claimed invention but Lambert or any analogous prior art fails to further teach or suggest a rear spring stop that includes retaining arms that flex between a spring retaining position and a ferrule assembly pass- through position, wherein when the retaining arms are in the ferrule assembly pass-through position the ferrule assembly can pass forwardly through the retaining arms, and wherein when the retaining arms are in the spring retaining position the retaining arms are adapted to oppose a rear end of the ferrule spring to prevent rearward movement of the rear end of the ferrule spring, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Claims 51, 52 are allowed. Lambert is the closest identified prior art to the claimed invention but Lambert or any analogous prior art fails to further teach or suggest a rear spring stop carried with the connector body that is laterally slidable relative to the connector body between a retaining position and a ferrule assembly pass-through position, wherein when the rear spring stop is in the ferrule assembly pass-through position the ferrule assembly can pass forwardly past the rear spring stop, and wherein when the rear spring stop is in the spring retaining position the rear spring stop is adapted to oppose a rear end of the ferrule spring to prevent rearward movement of the rear end of the ferrule spring, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. GB 2619109 A discloses an optical fiber cable assembly install process.
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