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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-9, filed 2/24/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3, 6-11, 13, 18, and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made under 35 U.S.C. 103.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-11, 13, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 6,302,594 B1).
Re. Claims 1 and 9, Lee discloses an optical fiber cable with an optical connector, comprising:
an optical fiber cable; and
an optical connector,
the optical fiber cable comprising:
an optical fiber 14 (Fig. 6; col. 3 lines 11-14);
a coating member 16 covering the optical fiber 14 (Fig. 6; col. 3 lines 14-16);
a tension member 18 being disposed around the coating member 16 (Fig. 6; col. 3 lines 16-17); and
an outer jacket 20 containing the optical fiber 14, the coating member 16, and the tension member 18 (Fig. 6; col. 3 lines 16-17),
the optical connector comprising:
an optical connector plug having a ferrule 38 and a cylindrical part 46, the ferrule 38 being disposed so as to protrude from a leading end and being formed with an insertion hole for the optical fiber 14, the cylindrical part 46 being provided so as to protrude from a trailing end that is on a side opposite to the leading end (Fig. 6; col. 3 lines 31-35);
a crimping member 47 being configured to fix the optical fiber cable to the optical connector plug by crimping (Fig. 6; col. 4 lines 20-21); and
a cylinder member (e.g. cylinder member including cavity 34) being interposed between the cylindrical part 46 and the crimping member 47 (Fig. 6; col. 4 lines 25-34),
the cylinder member being attached to the cylindrical part 46 in such a manner that an inner circumferential surface of the cylinder member is in contact with an outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical part 46 (Fig. 6; col. 4 lines 25-28),
the crimping member 47 having a cylindrical shape (Fig. 6; col. 4 lines 20-21),
an inner circumferential surface of the crimping member 47 being at least partially crimped to at least a part of an outer circumferential surface of the cylinder member while having the tension member 18 of the optical fiber cable therebetween, at a first position in an axial direction at which the inner circumferential surface of the cylinder member is in contact with the outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical part 46 (Fig. 6; col. 4 lines 30-40),
the inner circumferential surface of the crimping member 47 being at least partially crimped to the outer jacket 20 of the optical fiber cable, at a second position in the axial direction (Fig. 6; col. 4 lines 30-40).
In Lee, the optical connector plug 10 is integrally formed with the cylinder member (e.g. cylinder member including cavity 34), and accordingly Lee does not disclose an arrangement wherein the cylinder member and the optical connector plug are individual separate components.
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to provide an optical fiber connector wherein the cylinder member and the optical connector plug are individual separate components, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Re. Claims 2 and 10, Lee renders obvious the optical connector plug as discussed above. Lee also discloses the inner circumferential surface of the cylinder member is at least partially crimped to at least a part of the outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical part (Fig. 6; col. 4 lines 30-40). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claims 13 and 19, Lee renders obvious the optical connector plug as discussed above. Lee also discloses the cylinder member has a first protrusion (e.g. corrugated surface) that protrudes outward from the outer circumferential surface (Fig. 6). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claims 3 and 11, Lee renders obvious the optical connector plug as discussed above. Lee also discloses the cylinder member has a first protrusion (e.g. outer corrugated surface) that protrudes outward from the outer circumferential surface (Fig. 6). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 6, Lee discloses a method for manufacturing an optical fiber cable with an optical connector, comprising:
a step of passing an optical fiber cable through a cylindrical crimping member 47 (Fig. 2);
a step of removing an outer jacket 20 of the optical fiber cable to expose a coating member 16, which covers an optical fiber 14, and to expose a tension member 18, which is disposed around the coating member 16 (Fig. 2; col. 3 lines 11-17);
a step of attaching a cylinder member (e.g., cylindrical member with cavity 34) to a cylindrical part 46 that is provided to an optical connector plug, in such a manner that an inner circumferential surface of the cylinder member is in contact with an outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical part 46 (Fig. 5; col. 3 lines 57-59; col. 4 lines 22-28),
a step of removing the coating member 16 at a leading end of the optical fiber cable to expose the optical fiber 14 (Fig. 3; col. 3 lines 64-67);
a step of fixing the optical fiber 14 that is exposed, to a ferrule 38 of the optical connector plug by bonding (col. 4 lines 60-65);
a first crimping step of sliding the crimping member in an axial direction, and crimping at least a part of an inner circumferential surface of the crimping member 47 to at least a part of an outer circumferential surface of the cylinder member while having the tension member 18 of the optical fiber cable therebetween, at a first position in the axial direction at which the inner circumferential surface of the cylinder member is in contact with the outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical part 46 (Fig. 6; col. 4 lines 30-40); and
a second crimping step of crimping at least a part of the inner circumferential surface of the crimping member 47 to the outer jacket 20 of the optical fiber cable, at a second position in the axial direction (Fig. 6; col. 4 lines 30-40).
In Lee, the optical connector plug 10 is integrally formed with the cylinder member (e.g. cylinder member including cavity 34), and accordingly Lee does not disclose a method including providing a cylinder member that is individual and separate from a cylindrical part that is provided to an optical connector plug, and attaching the cylinder member to the cylindrical part.
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to provide an optical fiber connector wherein the cylinder member and the optical connector plug are individual separate components, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Re. Claim 7, Lee renders obvious the method as discussed above. Lee also discloses the step of attaching the cylinder member to the cylindrical part 46, includes crimping at least a part of the inner circumferential surface of the cylinder member to at least a part of the outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical part 46 of the optical connector plug (col. 4 lines 35-40). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claims 8 and 18, Lee renders obvious the method as discussed above. Lee also discloses the first crimping step and the second crimping step are performed simultaneously (Fig. 6; col. 4 lines 30-40). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious for the reasons discussed above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 12, 14-17, and 20 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Re. Claims 4, 12, 14, 17, and 20, the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest the optical fiber cable with the optical, wherein the cylinder member has a second protrusion that protrudes inward from the inner circumferential surface.
Re. Claims 5, 15, 16, the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest the optical fiber cable with the optical connector, wherein the inner circumferential surface of the crimping member is crimped to the outer circumferential surface of the cylinder member at a plurality of positions at equal intervals in a circumferential direction.
The most applicable prior art, Lee (US 6,302,594 B2), addressed above, fails to disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed invention, specifically those portions highlighted above in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to R. PEACE whose telephone number is (571)272-8580. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at (571) 272-2397. 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.
/RHONDA S PEACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874 3/18/26