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 § 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) 1-5, 9, 10, and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP H09 243832 A Kazuya et al. (herein “Kazuya”, cited on the IDS filed 12/15/2023).
Regarding claim 1, Kazuya discloses in the figures,
A transition (30) for at least one optical fiber cable (20) through a partition (10), wherein the transition (30) comprises:
a sleeve (right side of 32 – see Fig. 3a), a compressible seal (34 – wherein seal is made of elastic rubber, which is a compressible material) and an electromagnetic shielding tube (left side of 32; wherein para [0012] of the full English translation discloses a metal fitting, which therefore has electromagnetic shielding properties), wherein
the sleeve (right side of 32) has a first end, a second end and an opening (see figures) extending in an axial direction from the first end for receiving the compressible seal (34), wherein the compressible seal (34) forms a seal around the optical fiber cable (20),
the shielding tube (left side of 32) has a first end, a second end and at least one through opening (shown in figures) arranged between the first end and the second end for receiving and shielding the at least one optical fiber cable (20),
wherein the second end of the sleeve (right side of 32) is connected to the first end of the shielding tube (left side of 32) wherein the at least one through opening of the shielding tube (left side of 32) is connected to the opening of the sleeve (right side of 32) for transition of the at least one optical fiber cable (20).
Regarding claim 2, Kazuya discloses in the figures, the second end of the sleeve (right side of 32) is integrated with the first end of the shielding tube (left side of 32) (figures show them as integrated).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Kazuya discloses the sleeve (right side of 32) and the electromagnetic shielding tube (left side of 32) comprise an electrically conductive material, namely metal (wherein para [0012] of the full English translation discloses a metal fitting).
Regarding claim 5, Kazuya discloses in the figures, the shielding tube (left side of 32) projects in the axial direction from the second end of the sleeve (right side of 32).
Regarding claim 9, Kazuya discloses in Fig. 1a, the compressible seal (34) comprises a front fitting (340) and a rear fitting (342) and a compressible base (344), wherein the front fitting (340) and the rear fitting (342) are arranged at opposite ends of the compressible base (see Abstract).
Regarding claim 10, Kazuya discloses in Fig. 1a, the front fitting (340) extends radially outwards so that when the compressible seal (34) is received in sleeve (right side of 32), the front fitting (342) abuts the first end of the sleeve (32) (see Abstract; Fig. 1b).
Regarding claim 13, Kazuya discloses in the figures, the sleeve (right side of 32) is tubular and the shielding tube (left side of 32) is tubular, wherein the sleeve (right side of 32) has a larger diameter than the shielding tube (left side of 32) (shown in e.g. Fig. 1 wherein right side of 32 has a larger diameter than left side of 32).
Regarding claim 14, Kazuya discloses in the figures, the second end of the sleeve (right side of 32) comprises an abutment surface extending in a radial direction between an outer tubular surface of the sleeve (right side of 32) and the shielding tube (left side of 32) (shown in Fig. 1a).
Regarding claim 15, Kazuya discloses in the figures, the transition (30) is arranged in a through opening of the partition (10), the abutment surface (35) abuts the partition (10) (abutment shown in Fig. 1b) and shielding tube (left side of 32) is arranged to extend through the opening of the partition (right side of 32).
Regarding claim 16, Kazuya discloses in the figures, the transition (30) is attached to the partition (10) by welding or by fastening means. The Examiner notes that the claim limitation “attached to the partition by welding or by fastening means” is drawn to a process of manufacturing which is incidental to the claimed apparatus. It is well established that a claimed apparatus cannot be distinguished over the prior art by a process limitation. Consequently, absent a showing of an unobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art, the subject product-by-process claim limitation has been considered, but not patentably distinct over Kazuya (see MPEP 2113).
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) 6-8, 11, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP H09 243832 A Kazuya et al. (herein “Kazuya”, cited on the IDS filed 12/15/2023).
Regarding claims 6, 7, 11, and 12, Kazuya is silent as to specifically having a plurality of through openings configured to receive one or several modules corresponding to the number of through openings, wherein the length of the shielding tube is at least four times the inner diameter of each of the through openings. However, adjusting the transition of Kazuya to hold multiple modules would require only routine skill in the art, since it has been held that a mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Generally several cables are in use and being connected at a time. Furthermore, adjusting the length of the shielding tube to be at least four times the inner diameter of each of the through openings, would require only routine skill in the art, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to optimize the length of the shielding tube to ensure a secure and stable connection without damage to the cable, and it would have been obvious to include multiple modules fitted accordingly, to optimize the cables and space being used.
Regarding claim 8, Kazuya discloses an outer surface of the sleeve (right side of 32) is at least partly threaded (para [0004], where in nut and screw relationship is disclosed). Kazuya is silent as to specifically the shielding tube (left side of 32) also being partly threaded. However, Kazuya shows possession of knowledge of threading the outer surface of the transition, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to also have the shielding tube be threaded so an additional element could be screwed on for added structural support and security.
Claim(s) 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP H09 243832 A Kazuya et al. (herein “Kazuya”, cited on the IDS filed 12/15/2023) in view of US 2017/0307829 A1 Fletcher (herein “Fletcher”, cited on the attached PTO-892).
Regarding claims 17-21, Kazuya is silent as to specifically including anti-rotational means. However, this is a known problem, especially in the field of fiber optics, due to the fragile and precise nature of optical alignment, thus the desire to keep a cable in place without undue rotation or bending. Fletcher is an example of a solution to this problem. Fletcher discloses anti-rotational means (paras [0013, 0017]) extending in an axial direction, wherein the front fitting comprises at least one opening for interacting with the anti-rotational means of the sleeve (30), wherein the anti- rotational means comprises at least two protrusions (see e.g. Fig. 7, 248) to form a bayonet mount together with the corresponding openings of the front fitting (see Figs. 10A and 10B). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to use anti-rotational means, since preventing rotation of the cable is desirable so as to prevent any damage to the cable once it is attached to the terminal.
Kayuza and Fletcher are silent as to specifically wherein the anti-rotational means comprises one or more screws received in corresponding holes in the first end of the sleeve, wherein the one or more screws cooperate with the corresponding one or more openings of the front fitting. However, screws are a well-known and readily available fastening and securing means. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to use screws as an anti-rotational means, since screws are known to prevent rotation, once screwed in place.
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
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874