Office Action Predictor
Application No. 18/544,178

OPTICAL FIBER COUPLER AND ALIGNMENT METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Dec 18, 2023
Examiner
HAYES, MARY A
Art Unit
2874
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Mo-Link Technology Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

82%
Career Allow Rate
578 granted / 703 resolved
Without
With
+7.5%
Interview Lift
avg trend
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
27 pending
730
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§102
34.0%
-6.0% vs TC avg
§112
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. These claims are omnibus type claims. Claims 5 and 6 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. Claim 5 claims, “the optical redirecting device is for providing downstream second optical output that is based on the first optical output redirected substantially 90 degrees in direction.” It is unclear what direction is meant by “in direction”. Turning to the instant Specification for clarification, it appears Applicant is attempting to claim, “the adjacent redirecting device 234 may be configured as a "45 degree turning surface" such that the overall incident first optical output 224 may be redirected substantially 90 degrees from the angle of incidence at the second lens module 230 for providing optical signal output at the end of the optical fiber cable 240” (para 0068]). However, it is improper to import claim limitations from the Specification. MPEP §2111.01 II. Claim 6 also similarly claims “in direction” and therefore suffers from the same deficiency. 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. Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 11,372,164 B2 Sabano et al. (herein, “Sabano”, cited on the attached PTO-892). Regarding claim 1, Sabano discloses in Figs. 1A and 5A-B (wherein Figs. 5A-B are exploded views of the optical connecter system 30 shown in Fig. 1A), an optical fiber coupler system (30) comprising: a first lens module (32) including a first lens array (32C) positioned adjacent an emitting source (shown in Fig. 1B, wherein optical signal is emitted from waveguide grating 12, which is shown at 32A in Fig. 1A; col. 4, lines 21-24), wherein light is emitted from substrate 10 into lens module 32 at input surface 32A), the first lens module including one or more collimating lenses (32C, col. 7, lines 34-43) providing a first optical output having reduced optical light energy density as compared to optical light emerging from the emitting source (col. 8, lines 44-59; wherein the collimated beam would have a reduced energy density, similar to para [0010] of the instant Specification); a second lens module (31) coupled to the first lens module (32), the second lens (31) module including: alignment features (32DL, 32DC, 32DR , 31HL, 31HC, 31HR) aligning the second lens module (31) with the first lens module (32) at the interface region, wherein the optical light energy density at the interface region is lower as compared to optical light emerging from the emitting source (col. 8, lines 44-59); and a second lens array including one or more focusing lenses (31C) and an optical redirecting device (31E) providing a downstream second optical output; and an optical fiber cable (20) integrally coupled to the second lens module (31) to receive the second optical output. Regarding claim 2, Sabano discloses in Figs. 1A and 5A-B, the second lens module (31) includes one or more fiber grooves (31F shown in Fig. 5A) positioning respective optic fibers of the optical fiber cable. Regarding claim 3, Sabano discloses in Figs. 1A and 5A-B, the one or more fiber grooves (31F) include at least one of a triangular or saw-tooth cross-sectional profile (shape shown in Fig. 5A). Regarding claim 5, Sabano discloses the optical redirecting device is for providing downstream second optical output that is based on the first optical output redirected substantially 90 degrees in direction (col. 7, lines 55-58; col. 10, lines 18-65). Regarding claim 6, Sabano discloses the optical redirecting device is for providing downstream second optical output that is based on the first optical output redirected by greater than 90 degrees in direction (col. 7, lines 55-58; col. 10, lines 18-65). Regarding claim 7, Sabano discloses the second optical output is focused optical light output having a light energy density greater than the light energy density of the first optical output (col. 7, lines 23-61, wherein the collimated light converges towards the fiber). Regarding claim 8, Sabano discloses in Figs. 1A and 5A-B, the first lens module (32) includes guiding apertures (32DL, 32DC, 32DR), and wherein the alignment features for aligning the second lens module (31) with the first lens module (32) include one or more guiding protrusions (31HL, 31HC, 31HR) for receipt within corresponding guiding apertures (32DL, 32DC, 32DR) of the first lens module (32). 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) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,372,164 B2 Sabano et al. (herein, “Sabano”, cited on the attached PTO-892) in view of CN 103827712 A Bylander et al. (herein, “Bylander”, cited on the attached PTO-892). Regarding claim 4, Sabano discloses bonding and fixing the various parts together but is silent as to specifically the respective optic fibers are affixed within fiber grooves and coupled to focusing lenses using a refractive index matching adhesive. However, Bylander discloses using index matching adhesive so as to reduce reflection loss (para [0083], English translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to use the index matching adhesive as taught by Bylander so as to reduce reflection loss. Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,372,164 B2 Sabano et al. (herein, “Sabano”, cited on the attached PTO-892) in view of US 2020/0363595 A1 Grann et al. (herein, “Grann”, cited on the attached PTO-892). Regarding claims 9 and 10, Sabano discloses in Figs. 1A and 5A-B, a substrate (10) for positioning the emitting source (12, see Figs. 3A and 3B; col. 4, lines 21-24). While Sabano discloses apertures and guiding columns for aligning other elements (see rejection of claim 8), Sabano is silent as to specifically using alignment apertures, guiding columns, and reference planes with regards to the substrate itself. However, Grann provides an example of an optical coupler system that includes a substrate (optic coupler body shown in Fig. 5) including one or more substrate apertures (shown in Fig. 8, where many apertures are shown including fiber receptacle 250 and opening shown to the right of arrow at 400) on opposing sides of the emitting source. Grann is silent as to specifically the first lens module including one or more guiding columns to align with respective substrate apertures for positioning the first lens module relative to the emitting source. However, Grann clearly possesses the knowledge of the benefits of using columns (“pins”) and aligning apertures to connect elements to one another. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate Grann’s disclosed column in aperture connecting method for different elements in the device of Sabano, as this is a known way of connecting elements as demonstrated by Grann. Using alignment pins ensures proper connection of elements in a direct and known manner. Regarding claim 10, Grann discloses in Fig. 1, providing one or more reference planes (shown as element protruding downwards to the right of collimating lenses 70) interfacing with the substrate for positioning the respective collimating lenses (70) evenly spaced. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARY A EL-SHAMMAA whose telephone number is (571)272-2469. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9am-6pm (flexible schedule). 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. /MARY A EL-SHAMMAA/Examiner, Art Unit 2874 /MICHELLE R CONNELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Mar 30, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12585118
WAVEGUIDE COMBINER WITH REDUCED LIGHT LEAKAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581996
INTERPOSER INTERCONNECTS AND ENCLOSURE FOR SILICON PHOTONICS LIDAR MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12572006
POLYMER EYEPIECE ASSEMBLIES FOR AUGMENTED AND MIXED REALITY SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12554077
SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE WITH EMBEDDED OPTICAL DIE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12546632
DISTRIBUTED POSITION DETECTION ROPE AND DISTRIBUTED POSITION DETECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+7.5%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 703 resolved cases by this examiner