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 prior art documents submitted by applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement(s) filed on February 21, 2024 have all been considered and made of record (note the attached copy(ies) of form PTO-1449).
Drawings
Six sheets of drawings were filed on November 29, 2023 and have been accepted by the examiner.
Inventorship
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 –
(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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 10, 13, 14, 16, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bringuier et al. (US 9,482,837 B2, herein “Bringuier”).
Claim 1. An optical fiber cable (50), comprising:
a cable jacket (18) having an interior surface that defines an interior cavity (tube 52) of the optical fiber cable;
a cable core (ribbon 13, cut away view is shown in Fig. 10A) disposed within the interior cavity (tube 52), the cable core comprising an optical fiber (12 in ribbon 13 shown in Fig. 1A);
a dielectric strength element (14, Col. 3, lines 40-44) embedded in the cable jacket (18); and
a toneable element (conductive wire 57 of toneable lobe 55) embedded in the cable jacket (18) and disposed proximal to the strength element (via web 59).
PNG
media_image1.png
201
317
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 2. Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, wherein the dielectric strength member (14) comprises a glass-reinforced plastic (GRP) rod (Col. 3, lines 40-44).
Claims 4, 6 and 7. Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, wherein the toneable element (57) comprises a conductive wire a 24-gauge copper wire (Col. 9, lines 50-57).
Claim 10. Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, wherein the dielectric strength element (14) is positioned between the toneable element (57) and the interior cavity (52, see Fig. 5).
Claim 13. Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, wherein the optical fiber cable is characterized by a preferential bend, and wherein the toneable element (57) is centered at a position that lies on a neutral axis of the optical fiber cable. See annotated figures below.
PNG
media_image2.png
239
460
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
268
489
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 14. Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, wherein the toneable element is centered at a position that is less than or equal to a threshold distance away from a neutral axis of the optical fiber cable, wherein the threshold distance is equal to one third of a distance between the neutral axis and an exterior surface of the optical fiber cable. Since Bringuier discloses toneable element is centered on the neutral axis such that the toneable position is zero from the threshold distance.
PNG
media_image4.png
420
668
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 16. Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, wherein the cable jacket (18) has a rounded rectangular cross-sectional profile when looking down a length of the optical cable (see Fig. 5).
Claim 17. Birnguier discloses the method comprising:
providing a cable core (ribbons 13), the cable core comprising at least one optical fiber (12);
providing a strength element (14);
providing a toneable element (57);
extruding cable jacket (18) around the cable core (13), strength member (14), and the toneable element (the jacket material is formed around the strength members, and cable core. “Jacket 18 and jacket portion 58 are typically co-extruded simultaneously using the same extrusion tooling.”; Col. 9, lines 48-67) such that the strength member and toneable element are embedded in the cable jacket and the toneable element is disposed proximal to the strength element (Fig. 5).
Claim 19. Bringuier discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the toneable element (57) comprises a conductive wire (24 gauge copper wire, Col. 9, lines 50-5).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bringuier in view of Roberts et al. (US 2008/0187276 A1, herein “Roberts”).
Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, but Bringuier is silent to the strength element comprises an aramid-reinforced plastic (ARP) rod.
Roberts teaches in Fig. 4 a ribbon cable (10) with strength members (30) and fiber (18). The strength members can be made of materials such as polyethylene, glass-reinforced plastic, aramid-reinforced plastic, or metal wires (Para [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the strength element of Bringuier with aramid-reinforced plastic strength element. One motivation would to be reduced the cable weight since aramid-reinforced plastic has high tensile strength and light weight.
Claims 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bringuier in view of Andrews et al. (US 2006/0029340 A1, herein “Andrews”).
Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1 and the method of claim 17, but Bringuier is silent to the conductive wire is a stranded wire.
Andrews teaches a locatable dielectric optical fiber cable having easily removable locating element. The locating element (12) in Andrews’ invention is equivalent to the toneable element of Bringuier cable. Andrews further teaches the metallic element in the locating element may be stranded or solid wire. Stranded wire provides greater flexibility and reduced bend memory while solid wire offers greater longevity in use (Para [0020]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the toneable element in Bringuier’s cable with stranded wire. One motivation would be to improve the toneable element flexibility.
Claims 8, 9, 11, 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bringuier in view of Abernathy et al. (US 20110229098 A1, herein “Abernathy”).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, but Bringuier does not disclose the toneable element is directly adjacent to the dielectric strength element such that the toneable element is in contact with the dielectric strength element.
Abernathy teaches in Fig. 9 an optical cable (90) provided with toneable element (81) wherein the toneable element is disposed adjacent to one of the strength members (34). Abernathy further teaches the toneable element (81) can be placed near the outer surface of the jacket for ease of access. Still, in another embodiment the toneable element (81) can be disposed within one of the strength members or a strength component could also be a toenable element (Para [0071]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the toneable element to be adjacent to the strength member. One motivation would be to use the rigidity of the strength member to support the toneable element, since Abernathy demonstrated in an embodiment that the toneable element can be a strength member.
Bringuier in view of Abernathy do not explicitly disclose the toneable is positioned between the dielectric strength element and the interior cavity.
However, it has been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japiske, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). The rearrangement in this case does not modify the operation of the device because placing the toneable element between the strength element and the interior cavity of the cable, as modified by Bringuier in view of Abernathy, can provide the strength reinforcement as it would be if placed adjacent to the strength member. The benefits of this modification include to provide strength and support to the conductive wire. In contrast, incorporating the toneable element and the strength member would increase the cable weight because the strength member would have to be a metal conductor large enough to provide rigidity to the cable. Furthermore, alternative material such as aramid-reinforced plastic cannot be used as the strength member since the strength member must function to conduct an electric signal and/or possess magnetism for locatable functionality.
Claim 11. Regarding claims 8 and 9, Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, but Bringuier does not disclose strength element has a radius and wherein a distance between the exterior of the strength element and the toneable element is less than twice the radius.
Abernathy teaches in Fig. 9 an optical cable (90) provided with toneable element (81) wherein the toneable element is disposed within one of the strength members (34, Para [0071]). Thus, the distance between the exterior of the strength element and the toneable element is less than twice the radius.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the toneable element to be adjacent to the strength member. One motivation would be to use the rigidity of the strength member to support the toneable element.
Claim 12. Regarding claims 8 and 9, Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, but Bringuier does not disclose the distance between the exterior of the strength element and the toneable element is less than the radius.
Abernathy teaches in Fig. 9 an optical cable (90) provided with toneable element (81) wherein the toneable element is disposed adjacent to one of the strength members (34). Thus, the distance between the exterior of the strength element and the toneable member is zero, less than the radius.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the toneable element to be adjacent to the strength member. One motivation would be to use the rigidity of the strength member to support the toneable element.
Regarding claim 18, Bringuier discloses the method claim 17, but Bringuier does not disclose the cable jacket is extruded around the cable core such that the toneable element is in direct contact with the strength element.
Abernathy teaches the cable jacket materials may be extruded such that the cable jacket contacts or is directly adjacent to the optical fibers and the strength components in the cable. Fig. 9 shows an optical cable (90) provided with toneable element (81) wherein the toneable element is disposed adjacent to one of the strength members (34). Abernathy further teaches and adhesion promoter (35) wherein the toneable element is placed adjacent to the strength member. Thus, extrusion of the embodiments in Fig. 8-10 using the same extrusion tooling would necessarily teach extruding the jacket material around the cable core such that the toneable element is in direction contact with the strength element.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the toneable element to be adjacent to the strength member. One motivation would be to use the rigidity of the strength member to support the toneable element.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bringuier.
Bringuier discloses the cable of claim 1, but Bringuier does not disclose the cable jacket has a substantially circular cross-sectional profile when looking down a length of the optical fiber cable.
In a separate embodiment, Bringuier teaches the rounded rectangular cross-sectional profile cable of Fig. 9 and 10 is disposed within a duct of a circular cross-sectional profile cable (Fig. 11A and 11B, Col. 2, lines 59-60).
PNG
media_image5.png
236
238
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flat cable in embodiment of Fig. 5 to a circular cable of Fig. 11A since the mechanical strength of a round cable is superior to flat cable due to the round shape ability to handle multi-directional bending and torsion stress. One motivation would be to improve the mechanical strength of the cable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erin D Chiem whose telephone number is (571)272-3102. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am - 6 pm.
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 A. 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.
/ERIN D CHIEM/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874