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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 6-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 12/20/25. Examiner further notes claim 9 was initially deemed generic in the restriction requirement of 10/24/25. However, upon further consideration of the claim language, it is clear that features of claim 9 pertain to a species not elected by Applicant and not generic to all the figures.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species I in the reply filed on 12/20/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that examination of three distinct invention is not a serious burden. This is not found persuasive because examiner believes otherwise and makes determination of burden not Applicant.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
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 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Peterson (Publication No.: US 2017/0192182 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Peterson teaches An active optical cable assembly, comprising an optical fiber connector (reference numeral 205 in Figure 2), an optical port adapter (reference numeral 203 in Figure 2) , and an optical transceiver (e.g. “optical transceiver” as in paragraph [0028] and throughout) which are arranged in sequence; wherein the optical port adapter is fixedly installed at one end of the optical transceiver (e.g. “The adaptor may be coupled to an optical device. The optical device may comprise an optical transceiver.” as in paragraph [0028]), and the optical fiber connector is in a pluggable connection with the optical port adapter (e.g. as illustrated in Figure 3); the optical fiber connector comprises a movable kit (reference numeral 209 in Figure 2) , a tail sleeve (reference numeral 207 in Figure 2) , an intermediate connection sleeve (e.g. the intermediate area between reference numerals 207 and 209 within which 211 rests as illustrated in Figure 2, Figure 3, and Figure 4), and a plug connector (e.g. the area upon which the “PULL” mechanism is situated and the area to the right of the PULL mechanism inserted into reference numeral 203 as illustrated in Figure 2 and Figure 3), wherein the tail sleeve, the intermediate connection sleeve and the plug connector being arranged sequentially (e.g. as illustrated in Figure 2), and the movable kit (reference numeral 209 in Figure 2) is sleeved on an outer side of the plug connector to prevent the plug connector from detaching from the optical port adapter after the plug connector is inserted into the optical port adapter; a blocking member (reference numeral 211 in Figure 2) is arranged between the tail sleeve and the movable kit to prevent the movable kit from sliding backwards; when the blocking member is removed and the movable kit is caused to slide backwards to the intermediate connection sleeve, the plug connector is enabled to be pulled out from the optical port adapter.
Regarding claim 2, Peterson teaches The active optical cable assembly of claim 1, wherein an inner side of the optical port adapter (reference numeral 203 in Figure 2) is provided with an elastic claw (e.g. as illustrated on the inner side wall of reference numeral 203 in Figure 2), and an outer side of a front end of the plug connector is provided with a corresponding buckle slot (e.g. as illustrated in Figure 2); when the front end of the plug connector is inserted into the optical port adapter, the elastic claw is coupled to the buckle slot, and a side wall of a front end of the movable kit is squeezed against an outer side of the elastic claw to prevent the elastic claw from stretching out and detaching from the buckle slot.
Regarding claim 3, Peterson teaches The active optical cable assembly of claim 1, wherein the blocking member specifically adopts an optical cable clamp ring (reference numeral 211 in Figure 2) , and an outer side of the intermediate connection sleeve is provided with a recession groove (e.g. as illustrated in Figure 2); when the optical cable clamp ring is sleeved on the recession groove, the movable kit is prevented from sliding backwards (e.g. as illustrated in Figure 4); when the optical cable clamp ring is removed and the movable kit is caused to slide back to the recession groove, the plug connector is enabled to be pulled out of the optical port adapter (e.g. as illustrated in Figure 2).
Regarding claim 10, Peterson teaches An assembly method for assembling an active optical cable assembly according to claim 1, comprising: inserting the plug connector at the front end of the optical fiber connector into the optical port adapter, and using the movable kit to achieve fastening between the plug connector and the optical port adapter; installing a blocking member between the tail sleeve and the movable kit on the optical fiber connector to prevent the movable kit from sliding backwards (e.g. as illustrated in Figure 4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peterson in view of ZHU LEI (CN 110501786 A), cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 4, Peterson teaches The active optical cable assembly of claim 3, but fails to specifically teach that the optical cable clamp ring is a closed ring structure, comprising a first half ring and a second half ring, wherein the first half ring and the second half ring are assembled to form a first ring core for accommodating the intermediate connection sleeve of the optical fiber connector, and the first half ring and the second half ring are connected in a buckle manner; wherein the first half ring comprises a first crossbeam and a first side arm and a second side arm which are located at each of two ends of the first crossbeam, respectively; and the second half ring comprises a second crossbeam and a third side arm and a fourth side arm which are located at each of two ends of the second crossbeam, respectively. However, ZHU LEI teaches that this optical cable clamp ring structure is well known in the art (Figure 8). One skilled in the art would have been motivated to utilize an optical cable clamp ring structure as claimed in order to further limit movement of elements of the locking mechanism (as in paragraph [0051]-[0056] of ZHU LEI). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art to utilize an optical cable clamp ring having a closed ring structure, comprising a first half ring and a second half ring, wherein the first half ring and the second half ring are assembled to form a first ring core for accommodating the intermediate connection sleeve of the optical fiber connector, and the first half ring and the second half ring are connected in a buckle manner; wherein the first half ring comprises a first crossbeam and a first side arm and a second side arm which are located at each of two ends of the first crossbeam, respectively; and the second half ring comprises a second crossbeam and a third side arm and a fourth side arm which are located at each of two ends of the second crossbeam, respectively as taught by ZHU LEI in Peterson.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of references and ZHU LEI in particular teaches The active optical cable assembly of claim 4, wherein an outer side of the first side arm is provided with a first protrusion and a first recess, and an outer side of the second side arm is provided with a second protrusion and a second recess; the third side arm is provided with a first clamp hook thereon, and the fourth side arm is provided with a second clamp hook thereon; when assembling, the first clamp hook and the second clamp hook on the second half ring are squeezed into the first recess and the second recess in the first half ring, respectively, and are buckled with the first protrusion and the second protrusion on the first half ring, respectively (e.g. as illustrated in Figure 8).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AGUSTIN BELLO whose telephone number is (571)272-3026. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9 AM - 5 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, David Payne can be reached at (571)272-3024. 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.
/AGUSTIN BELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635