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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, directed to claims 1-9 and 13-19 in the reply filed on 06 December 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claims of Group II and Group III have been amended to depend from Claim 1 of Group I. This is not found persuasive. Merely changing the dependency of the claim does not overcome the lack of unity restriction requirement. The special technical features of Groups II and III are not shared with Group I. However, should Group I be allowable, claims 10-12 will be rejoined should all of the limitations of the allowable claim be present in claims 10-12. Therefore, claims 10-12 are withdrawn.
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 (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 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0153405 to Bringuier et al.
In regards to claim 1, Bringuier recites a micro-cable (Figure 1; micro-modules and subassemblies [0017]), comprising a cable core (112) and an outer sheath (134) covering a peripheral surface of the cable core, wherein the cable core comprises a central strengthening member (124), a plurality of optical units (114) and a sealant (132 & 136), the plurality of optical units being twisted [0031] around the central strengthening member, and twisting gaps between the plurality of optical units being filled with the sealant [0032].
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) 2, 3, 7, 13, 14 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0153405 to Bringuier et al as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of CN-1158351 to Bao and JP-3319621 hereinafter JP-3319621.
In regards to claims 2, 7, 13 and 18, although Bringuier does not expressly recite the materials of the sealant to comprise an active resin, a thickener, and a tackifier, the thickener and the tackifier being uniformly mixed in the active resin and the curable resin is a light curable resin, the light curable resin comprises a base resin, a photosensitizer, and an activator, the photosensitizer and the activator being uniformly mixed in the base resin, Bringuier teaches the sealant to be used for protection and improved coupling of adjoining surfaces of the cable which would improve the strength of the cable. JP-3319621 further teaches a resin composition within an optical fiber in addition to the essential components of the optical fiber, the resin composition further include tackifiers and thickeners for the purpose of providing a stable optical cable. Additionally, Bao teaches providing a thickener and tackifier mix uniformly within the resin composition. Since Bringuier, Bao and JP-3319621 all teach the sealant/resin composition for the purpose of strengthening the optical cable, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have provided the resin of Bao and JP-3319621 in place of the sealant of Bringuier in order to form an improved strengthened optical cable as desired.
In regards to claims 3 and 14, although Bringuier in view of Bao and JP-3319621 does not expressly recite wherein the sealant has a hardness of 35 HA -45 HA, and a density of 1.2 g/cm3-1.4 g/cm3 after being cured, Bringuier in view of Bao and JP-3319621 does teach in combination a cured resin with a uniformly mixed thickener and tackifier. Since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and further since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges or values through routine experimentation when the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the sealant has a hardness of 35 HA -45 HA, and a density of 1.2 g/cm3-1.4 g/cm3 after being cured to provide an improved optical cable. In re Aller, 105 USPA 233; In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)
Claim(s) 4, 5, 15, 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0153405 to Bringuier et al as applied to claim 1 above.
In regards to claims 4, 5, 15 and 16, Bringuier recites each optical unit comprises an optical fiber bundle [0020], the optical fiber bundle comprises a plurality of optical fibers (118), and the plurality of optical fibers are distributed in a bundle shape (ribbon) at intervals in the curable resin. Although Bringuier does not expressly recite a heat curable resin, it would have been an obvious matter of common skill and design choice to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use a heat curable resin for bonding together a flat optical fiber ribbon since curable resins are readily available and facilitate high-density cable packing for enhanced structural integrity. Furthermore, although Bringuier teaches each optical unit further comprises a secondary coating layer [0020] covering the peripheral surface of the optical fiber bundle, Bringuier does not expressly recite a material of the secondary coating layer comprising polybutylene terephthalate, and a thickness of the secondary coating layer being 0.1 mm -0.3 mm. However, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges or values through routine experimentation when the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art and therefore discovering the optimum or workable ranges of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have provided recite a material of the secondary coating layer comprising polybutylene terephthalate, and a thickness of the secondary coating layer being 0.1mm - 0.3mm since coating layers comprising polybutylene terephthalate are readily available and the secondary coating layer being 0.1mm - 0.3mm provide enhanced structural integrity.
In regards to claim 9, although Bringuier does not expressly recite materials of the outer sheath comprise at least one of polyurethane elastomer, polyvinyl chloride, thermoplastic elastomer, and thermoplastic polyester elastomer; and a thickness of the outer sheath is 0.4mm - 0.8mm, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges or values through routine experimentation when the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art and therefore discovering the optimum or workable ranges of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have provided recite materials of the outer sheath comprise at least one of polyurethane elastomer, polyvinyl chloride, thermoplastic elastomer, and thermoplastic polyester elastomer; and a thickness of the outer sheath is 0.4mm - 0.8mm since coating layers comprising at least one of polyurethane elastomer, polyvinyl chloride, thermoplastic elastomer, and thermoplastic polyester elastomer are readily available a thickness of the outer sheath is 0.4mm - 0.8mm provide enhanced structural integrity.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 8, 17 and 19 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.
In regards to claims 6 and 17, the prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest the number of optical fibers in each optical fiber bundle is 12 or 24; when the number of optical fibers in each optical fiber bundle is 12, a diameter of the each optical fiber bundle is 0.9-1.2mm, and a diameter of each optical unit is 1.3mm - 1.7mm; and when the number of optical fibers in each optical fiber bundle is 24, a diameter of the optical fiber bundle is 1.4mm - 1.7mm, and a diameter of each optical unit is 1.6 mm - 2.3 mm in addition to the accompanying features of the independent claim.
In regards to claims 8 and 19, the prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest the number of optical fibers in each optical fiber bundle is 12 or 24; when the number of optical fibers in each optical fiber bundle is 12, a diameter of the optical fiber bundle is 1.0mm -1.5mm; and when the number of optical fibers in each optical fiber bundle is 24, a diameter of the optical fiber bundle is 1.5mm - 2.0mm in addition to the accompanying features of the independent claim.
References Cited
The references cited made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. None of the documents cited by the Examiner discloses or reasonably suggests the allowable subject matter discussed above.
The documents submitted by applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement have been considered and made of record. Note attached copy of form PTO-1449. None of the references submitted by Applicant discloses or reasonably suggest the allowable subject matter discussed above.
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TINA M WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-2352. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30.
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.
/TINA WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874