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 .
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.
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, 4, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. PGPub 2015/0355430 by Clampitt et al.
Regarding claim 1, Clampitt teaches an optical fiber cable (110, Fig. 2) comprising: a core (126, which includes buffer tubes 116, a filler 118, a strength member 122) including optical fibers (124) and a wrapping member that wraps the optical fibers (binder sleeve 120); a sheath (jacket 112 and/or armor 114) housing the core; and a rip cord (128) disposed between the core and the sheath, wherein a recessed portion (e.g., between adjacent buffer tubes 116) is recessed inward in a radial direction of the core in the wrapping member, and at least a portion of the rip cord is disposed inside the recessed portion (as illustrated in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Clampitt further teaches a gap (cavity 130, Fig. 2) surrounded by the recessed portion and the sheath is positioned formed between the core and the sheath, and a dimension of the gap in the radial direction is smaller than a dimension of the gap in a circumferential direction of the core (as illustrated in Fig. 2, in which the cavity is elongated in a circumferential direction of the cable 110).
Regarding claim 7, Clampitt further teaches that, inside the gap (130), the rip cord (128) is sandwiched between the recessed portion (defined by the sleeve 120) and the sheath (112).
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2019-113617A patent publication by Ono et al. (cited by applicant).
Regarding claim 1, Ono teaches an optical fiber cable (Fig. 1) comprising: a core (11) including optical fibers and a wrapping member (a first adhesive film 21) that wraps the optical fibers (core 11 is configured by collecting a plurality of optical fibers); a sheath (an outer sheath 30) housing the core; and a rip cord (22) disposed between the core and the sheath, wherein a recessed portion (where the adhesive film concaves around the rip cords 22) is recessed inward in a radial direction of the core in the wrapping member, and at least a portion of the rip cord is disposed inside the recessed portion (as illustrated in Fig. 1).
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clampitt et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. PGPub 2020/0142144 by Blazer et al.
Regarding claim 2, Clampitt teaches the optical fiber cable comprising the rip cord (128), the sheath (112) and a central strength member (122) but not the strength members embedded in the sheath. Blazer also teaches an optical fiber cable (Fig. 7), comprising a wrap (enclosing element 30) defining a core therein, ripcords (34), a sheath (jacket 12) and a pair of tensile strength members (232) embedded in the sheath (12) such that the core is disposed between one of the pair of tensile strength members and the other of the pair of tensile strength members (strength members 232 are located on diametrically opposite sides, of the core as illustrated in Fig. 7), wherein in a transverse-sectional view orthogonal to a central axis of the core, the rip cord is disposed within a range of -45° to +45° around a center of the core with a neutral line connecting centers of the pair of tensile strength members (the ripcords 45 are disposed closely to the tensile strength member 232 in a circumferential direction as illustrated in Fig. 2). Furthermore, a plurality of individual strength members 32 may be arranged radially at substantially evenly spacial points around the circumference of the cable (¶[0039], i.e., when four or more strength members are evenly distributed around the circumference, the ripcords must be within -45° to +45° circumferentially from the strength members), in order to eliminate preferential bend planes from forming in the cable. It thus would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to embed the strength members circumferentially in the jacket, in an evenly spacial manner, as suggested by Blazer, for the same reason stated.
Claim(s) 3, 6, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ono et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. PGPub 2017/0153404 by Takeda et al.
Regarding claim 3, Ono teaches the optical fiber cable comprising the ripcords and the strength member but not the core having an elliptical shape in a transverse-sectional view orthogonal to a central axis of the core. Takeda teaches an optical cable comprising a core (2) with optical fibers (4A), a sheath (6), rip cords (8) and strength members (7), wherein the core (defined by a housing 6A) is an elliptical shape in a transverse-sectional view orthogonal to a central axis of the core, except for a portion in which the recessed portion is positioned, and the recessed portion is positioned on a major axis of the core. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ono’s invention, by using the elliptical shape core as suggested by Takeda to house the optical fiber, in order to account for different dimensions of the rip cords and the strength members inside the cable, while still maintaining a circular cross-section of the optical cable without adding undue thickness to the sheath (in Ono as modified by Takeda, the ripcords and portion of the adhesive tape would be inside the housing 6A in a concaved manner, therefore causing that portion, along the L2 direction/vertical major axis in Ono, to be not in an elliptical shape).
Regarding claim 8, Ono and Takeda further suggest a pair of tensile strength members embedded in the sheath such that the core is disposed between one of the pair of tensile strength members (as illustrated in Fig. 1B of Takeda, in order to restrain distortion or bending applied to the optical fiber unit due to the shrinkage of the cable sheath) and the other of the pair of tensile strength members, and the rip cord overlaps at least one of the pair of tensile strength members in the radial direction (taught by Ono in Fig. 1, for creating a preferential bending plane).
Regarding claim 6, Ono teaches a method of manufacturing an optical fiber cable comprising: forming a core (11) by wrapping optical fibers (core 11 is configured by collecting a plurality of optical fibers) with a wrapping member (21); forming a rip cord (22), wherein a recessed portion (where the adhesive film concaves around the rip cords 22) recessed inwards in a radial direction of the core is formed in the wrapping member, and the rip cord is introduced into the recessed portion.
Ono teaches that the cable is obtained by extruding the sheath (30) to cover a reinforcement unit (20A) that includes the rip cord (22) and the wrapping member (21) but does not specify a process of forming the rip cord in the cable. Takeda teaches a method of manufacturing an optical cable (1) using an extruder (Fig. 8), comprising passing the core through a core hole (guide hole 16A) of a nipple (16, Fig. 9); and passing a rip cord (8) through a rip cord hole (rip cord hole 16C) of the nipple, wherein while passing the core and the rip cord. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to using the guide hole during the extrusion process of the cable as suggested by Takeda, for the purpose of guiding the rip cord to a precise and desired location within the optical cable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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. Relevant prior art fails to teach or suggest a range of a recess ration and a relationship between the recess ratio of the recessed portion and the outer diameter of the sheath, and it is not considered obvious to an ordinary artisan to investigate and perform experimentations to determine the recess ratio, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention. Prior art such as Ono clearly bases any recess ratio exclusively on the diameter of the rip cord and independent of the cable diameter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. JP2000241681A discloses a method of making optical fiber cable with ripcords using an extruder nipple.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLIE PENG whose telephone number is (571)272-2177. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 6PM.
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.
/CHARLIE Y PENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874