Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/574,467

OPTICAL FIBER RIBBON AND PRODUCTION METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 27, 2023
Examiner
WONG, TINA MEI SENG
Art Unit
2874
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Swcc Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
909 granted / 1078 resolved
+16.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
1123
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
62.7%
+22.7% vs TC avg
§102
24.9%
-15.1% vs TC avg
§112
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1078 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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. Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application 2021/0325624 to Yamaguchi et al. In regards to claims 1 and 2, Yamaguchi recites an optical fiber ribbon (Figures 7B-C; 30), comprising: a plurality of single-core coated optical fibers (10) disposed in parallel; a plurality of coupling portions (32) disposed between adjacent ones of the plurality of single-core coated optical fibers, wherein the optical fiber ribbon includes an identification region (identification mark) in which a plurality of dots (Figure 1, 11) are disposed on the plurality of single-core coated optical fibers and/or the plurality of coupling portions. But Yamaguchi fails to expressly recite a ratio of a total area of the plurality of dots disposed on each of the plurality of single-core coated optical fibers to an area of the single-core coated optical fiber is less than or equal to 20% (claim 1) or less than or equal to 15.6% (claim 2) when the identification region is seen in plan view. However, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges through routine experimentation of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it is known and recited by Yamaguchi to provide identification marks in order to distinguish the individual optical fibers. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have chosen the appropriate a ratio of a total area of the plurality of dots disposed on each of the plurality of single-core coated optical fibers to an area of the single-core coated optical fiber is less than or equal to 20% or less than or equal to 15.6% when the identification region is seen in plan view for the purpose of decreasing transmission loss and easily visually identify cables. [0024] In regards to claim 3, Yamaguchi recites the optical fiber ribbon includes a plurality of the identification regions. (Figure 1) In regards to claim 4, Yamaguchi recites at least one of the plurality of dots is disposed astride two adjacent ones of the plurality of single-core coated optical fibers. (Figure 1) Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application 2021/0053338 to Sekine et al. In regards to claims 1 and 2, Sekine recites an optical fiber ribbon (Figure s 1A & 2; 1), comprising: a plurality of single-core coated optical fibers (2) disposed in parallel; a plurality of coupling portions (3) disposed between adjacent ones of the plurality of single-core coated optical fibers, wherein the optical fiber ribbon includes an identification region (5) in which a plurality of dots [0079] are disposed on the plurality of single-core coated optical fibers and/or the plurality of coupling portions. But Sekine fails to expressly recite a ratio of a total area of the plurality of dots disposed on each of the plurality of single-core coated optical fibers to an area of the single-core coated optical fiber is less than or equal to 20% (claim 1) or less than or equal to 15.6% (claim 2) when the identification region is seen in plan view. However, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges through routine experimentation of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it is known and recited by Sekine to provide identification marks in order to distinguish the individual optical fibers. Sekine further recites the mesh patterns used to form the dots to be capable of being modified to form different shapes and areas to form the identification markings. (Figure 6B; [0080-0081]) Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have chosen the appropriate a ratio of a total area of the plurality of dots disposed on each of the plurality of single-core coated optical fibers to an area of the single-core coated optical fiber is less than or equal to 20% or less than or equal to 15.6% when the identification region is seen in plan view for the purpose of easily visually identify cables. In regards to claim 3, Sekine recites the optical fiber ribbon includes a plurality of the identification regions. (Figure 1A) In regards to claim 4, Yamaguchi recites at least one of the plurality of dots is disposed astride two adjacent ones of the plurality of single-core coated optical fibers. (Figure 1A) References Cited The references cited made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The documents submitted by applicant in the Information Disclosure Statements have been considered and made of record. Note attached copy of forms PTO-1449 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 27, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601874
MANAGING TEMPERATURES IN INTEGRATED CIRCUITS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601886
PANEL SYSTEM WITH MANAGED CONNECTIVITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591139
CURVED LIGHTGUIDE IN A SEE-THROUGH SHELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12571975
PHOTOELECTRIC HYBRID DEVICE BASED ON GLASS WAVEGUIDE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560762
REFLECTORS FOR A PHOTONICS CHIP
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+14.1%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1078 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month