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 Interpretation
Claim 31/41/47 refer to “directing a laser beam”. This is not the same as focal point/depth of the laser beam. Examiner interprets directing the laser beam as written, the direction of the laser beam.
Claim 49 has specification support through instant Fig. 4A
Claim Objections
Claim 31, 36, 41-42, 47 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 31/41/47 recites “longitudinal axes” which should be “the longitudinal axes”
Claim 36 recites “so as to bond” in a wherein clause which is incorrect passive grammar. The wherein clause should be “wherein directing the laser beam bonds both the…”.
Claim 42 recites “the focus” which should be “a focus”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 37-38 and 46 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 37 recites “capillary tube or tubes”. “tubes” lacks antecedent basis. The Examiner understands from the instant specification and drawings that a plurality of tubes will be position and bond to its position; however, the claims do not explicitly state so.
Claim 38/46 refers to “a next contact line”. There is no express nexus from the parent claim to what is a “next contact line”. The Examiner understands of an implied rotating of the outer tube in the instant claim; however, the instant claim 31+38 does not have antecedent basis for a second primary capillary tube to make a “next contact line”. Correction is required.
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.
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.
Claims 31-44, 46-48, and 50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kosolapov et al (“Hollow-core revolver fibre with double-capillary reflective cladding”, 2016), further in view of Zhang et al (“Design and Fabrication of a Novel Core-Suspended Optic Fiber for Distributed Gas Sensor”, 2014) and Liu et al (US-20130068384-A1).
Regarding claim 31, Kosolapov teaches of fabricating a fibre preform comprising providing a hollow outer tube of glass (Heraues Suprasil F300 high-quality silca tube, D=25mm and d=21mm) and providing a capillary tube (D=12.3mm and d=8.4mm) (Fig. 2a; p. 268 left column ¶ “A fibre preform was made…”).
Kosolapov teaches of positioning the capillary tube inside the outer tube (p. 268 left column ¶ “A fibre preform was made…”), but is silent on laying the capillary tube against the inner surface of the outer tube along a contact line parallel to the longitudinal axes. In related rod in tube preform art, Zhang teaches of lying the capillary rod against the inner surface of the hollow tube along the axis to weld to be automatically fixed by gravity (Fig. 1/2; p. 98 ¶ ”The fabrication technology of the CSCF…”). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the complex optical fibre preform by positioning the capillary tube inside the outer tube along a contact line parallel to the longitudinal axes by using gravity to fix the two surfaces.
Both Kosolapov and Zhang teach of using oxy-hydrogen burners to bond the capillary tube to the outer tube. In related glass bonding art, Liu teaches of bonding a top and bottom substrate in contact with each other by directing a laser beam incident to an outer surface of the substrate such that a focal point of the laser beam occurs at a contact interface [0035] (Fig. 2). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use laser bonding at the contact line of the capillary tube and hollow outer tube as an alternative to the oxy-hydrogen burners taught by Kosolapov/Zhang to minimize thermal stress and suppress thermal cracking [0028]. "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 32, depending from claim 31, Liu teaches that the laser beam deposits heat energy that
causes softening (melting) of the glass to enable bonding [0028].
Regarding claim 33, depending from claim 32, Liu teaches of using nonlinear optical absorption for the glass-bonding laser beam [0028]. Liu expressly teaches that changing their pulsed laser from short to long pulses relates to a linear absorption laser beam which is more suitable for transparent substrates [0024]. Liu chooses to use shorter nonlinear absorption laser beam because the workable material for linear absorption laser beam is more limited. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to know which materials are suitable for linear absorption laser beam such as glass with sufficient transparent properties to absorb the laser wavelength.
Regarding claim 34, depending from claim 32, Liu teaches that the laser beam undergoes linear optical absorption in the glass [0028].
Regarding claim 35, depending from claim 31, Liu teaches that the laser beam undergoes nonlinear optical absorption in the glass to generate photo-ionisation to enable the bonding [0028].
Regarding claim 36, depending from claim 31, Kosolapov teaches of a second fabrication step of inserting a hollow secondary capillary the with an outer diameter smaller than an inner diameter of the primary capillary tube and positioning the secondary capillary tube inside the primary capillary tube such that an outer surface of the secondary capillary tube lies against an inner surface of the primary capillary tube in a radial alignment (p. 268 right column, ¶ “In the second preform fabrication step…”, Fig. 2b-d). In general, the transposition of process steps, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes (e.g., Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959); In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946); In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930)). See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C).
Regarding claim 37, depending from claim 31, Kosolapov teaches of insert the primary capillary tube into the outer tube (p. 268 left column ¶ “A fibre preform was made…”). Kosolapov teaches of supporting the outer tube in a working lathe (p. 268 right column, ¶ “In the second preform fabrication step…”). Zhang teaches of supporting the outer tube in a horizontal orientation and thus orienting the capillary and/or outer tube under the influence of gravity to position while bonding (p. 98 ¶ ”The fabrication technology of the CSCF…”).
Regarding claim 38, depending from claim 1, Kosolapov teaches of using a rotation stage that holds the outer tube (p. 268 right column, ¶ “In the second preform fabrication step…”, glass working lathe). Kosolapov teaches of a plurality of contact lines (Fig. 2b-d); Kosolapov is modified with Zhang which depends on the gravity effect to establish a contact line (p. 98 ¶ ”The fabrication technology of the CSCF…”). Though a further positioning and laser beam directing step is not explicitly stated, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to logically rotate the outer tube using the rotational stage of Kosolapov to establish a next contact line (for a next capillary tube as required by the combination of Kosolapov and Zhang) and repeat directing the laser beam with respect to the next contact line to enable the bonding (as taught by the combination of modified Kosolapov with Liu). In general, the transposition of process steps, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes (e.g., Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959); In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946); In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930)). See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C).
Regarding claim 39, depending from claim 31, Liu teaches that their laser uses short pulses of different durations and scanning speed [0027]. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, each pulse is a discrete location spaced apart by the scanning speed along the contact line reading on one or more location continuously along the contact line.
Regarding claim 40, depending from claim 31, Kosolapov teaches of the second preform fabrication step in which the outer tube is inserted inside an additional outer tube (p. 268 right column, ¶ “In the second preform fabrication step…”). Kosolapov is modified with Zhang which depends on the gravity effect to establish a contact line (p. 98 ¶ ”The fabrication technology of the CSCF…”). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention that the second preform fabrication step of positioning the outer tube inside the additional outer tube would also be subject to gravity to establish a further contact line because the process occurs in regular gravity conditions.
Regarding claim 41, Kosolapov teaches of fabricating a fibre preform comprising providing a hollow outer tube of glass (Heraues Suprasil F300 high-quality silica tube, D=25mm and d=21mm) and providing a capillary tube (D=12.3mm and d=8.4mm) (Fig. 2a; p. 268 left column ¶ “A fibre preform was made…”).
Kosolapov teaches of positioning the capillary tube inside the outer tube (p. 268 left column ¶ “A fibre preform was made…”), but is silent on laying the capillary tube against the inner surface of the outer tube along a contact line parallel to the longitudinal axes. In related rod in tube preform art, Zhang teaches of lying the capillary rod against the inner surface of the hollow tube along the axis to weld to be automatically fixed by gravity (Fig. 1/2; p. 98 ¶ ”The fabrication technology of the CSCF…”). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the complex optical fibre preform by positioning the capillary tube inside the outer tube along a contact line parallel to the longitudinal axes by using gravity to fix the two surfaces.
Both Kosolapov and Zhang teach of using oxy-hydrogen burners to bond the capillary tube to the outer tube. In related glass bonding art, Liu teaches of bonding a top and bottom substrate in contact with each other by directing a laser beam incident to an outer surface of the substrate or an inner surface of the two substrate at one or more locations aligned with the contact [0035] (Fig. 2). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use laser bonding as an alternative to the oxy-hydrogen burners taught by Kosolapov/Zhang to minimize thermal stress and suppress thermal cracking [0028]. "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 42, depending from claim 41, Liu teaches of focusing the laser beam through the top substrate and into the bottom substrate [0038] Fig. 2, which would coincide with the contact line.
Regarding claim 43, depending from claim 41, Zhang teaches of directing their oxy-hydrogen burner in radial alignment with the contact line (Fig. 2). Liu is incorporated and modifies the oxy-hydrogen burner with directing the laser beam (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 44, depending from claim 41, Kosolapov teaches of using a rotation stage that holds the outer tube (p. 268 right column, ¶ “In the second preform fabrication step…”, glass working lathe). Kosolapov shows the capillary tube is radially aligned with the outer tube to create a contact point (Fig. 1). Liu is incorporated and modifies the oxy-hydrogen burner with directing the laser beam (Fig. 2) wherein to accomplish the plurality of angularly spaced capillary tubes bonded to the outer tube, the laser beam of Liu is directed angularly spaced from the previous contact line to the next contact line of the next capillary tube to be bonded.
Regarding claim 46, depending from claim 41, Kosolapov teaches of using a rotation stage that holds the outer tube (p. 268 right column, ¶ “In the second preform fabrication step…”, glass working lathe). Kosolapov teaches of a plurality of contact lines (Fig. 2b-d); Kosolapov is modified with Zhang which depends on the gravity effect to establish a contact line (p. 98 ¶ ”The fabrication technology of the CSCF…”). Though a further positioning and laser beam directing step is not explicitly stated, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to logically rotate the outer tube using the rotational stage of Kosolapov to establish a next contact line (for a next capillary tube as required by the combination of Kosolapov and Zhang) and repeat directing the laser beam with respect to the next contact line to enable the bonding (as taught by the combination of modified Kosolapov with Liu). In general, the transposition of process steps, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes (e.g., Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959); In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946); In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930)). See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C).
Regarding claim 47-48, Kosolapov teaches of fabricating a fibre preform comprising providing a hollow outer tube of glass (Heraues Suprasil F300 high-quality silca tube, D=25mm and d=21mm) and providing a capillary tube (D=12.3mm and d=8.4mm) (Fig. 2a; p. 268 left column ¶ “A fibre preform was made…”).
Kosolapov teaches of positioning the capillary tube inside the outer tube (p. 268 left column ¶ “A fibre preform was made…”), a second fabrication step of inserting a hollow secondary capillary tbe with an outer diameter smaller than an inner diameter of the primary capillary tube and positioning the secondary capillary tube inside the primary capillary tube such that an outer surface of the secondary capillary tube lies against an inner surface of the primary capillary tube in a radial alignment (p. 268 right column, ¶ “In the second preform fabrication step…”, Fig. 2b-d, but is silent on laying the capillary tube against the inner surface of the outer tube along a contact line parallel to the longitudinal axes. In related rod in tube preform art, Zhang teaches of lying the capillary rod against the inner surface of the hollow tube along the axis to weld to be automatically fixed by gravity (Fig. 1/2; p. 98 ¶ ”The fabrication technology of the CSCF…”). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the complex optical fibre preform by positioning the capillary tube inside the outer tube along a contact line parallel to the longitudinal axes by using gravity to fix the two surfaces.
Kosolapov teaches of fusing the secondary capillary tube inside the primary tube prior to positioning the primary capillary tube inside the outer tube (p. 268 left column ¶ “A fibre preform was made…”; right column, ¶ “In the second preform fabrication step…”). In general, the transposition of process steps, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes (e.g., Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959); In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946); In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930)). See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C).
Both Kosolapov and Zhang teach of using oxy-hydrogen burners to bond the capillary tube to the outer tube. In related glass bonding art, Liu teaches of bonding a top and bottom substrate in contact with each other by directing a laser beam incident to an outer surface of the substrate or an inner surface of the two substrate at one or more locations aligned with the contact [0035] (Fig. 2). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use laser bonding as an alternative to the oxy-hydrogen burners taught by Kosolapov/Zhang to minimize thermal stress and suppress thermal cracking [0028]. "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). Though Kosolopov teaches of separate bonding steps In general (p. 268 left column ¶ “A fibre preform was made…”; right column, ¶ “In the second preform fabrication step…”), the transposition of process steps or the splitting of one step into two, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes. Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention laser bond the aligned secondary capillary tube, primary capillary tube, and outer tube, all in radial alignment with the contact line, in one bonding step is substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes.
Regarding claim 50, depending from claim 47, Liu teaches that the laser beam undergoes nonlinear optical absorption in the glass to generate photo-ionisation to enable the bonding [0028].
Claim 45 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kosolapov et al (“Hollow-core revolver fibre with double-capillary reflective cladding”, 2016), Zhang et al (“Design and Fabrication of a Novel Core-Suspended Optic Fiber for Distributed Gas Sensor”, 2014), and Liu et al (US-20130068384-A1) as applied to claim 41 above and further in view of Koyama et al (US-20010028502-A1).
Regarding claim 45, according to modified Kosolapov of claim 41, Liu teaches that adjacent welds next to the first weld to strengthen the weld [0031]. Liu does not expressly teach of a second laser beam. In related laser processing of glass art, Koyama teaches of a second laser beam at the location simultaneously with directing the laser beam (Fig. 7). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify Liu to have a second laser beam at the location with directing the laser beam to control the frequency of the two overlapping laser beams [0077] as constructive and deconstructive use of laser beams is known in the art.
Claim 49 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kosolapov et al (“Hollow-core revolver fibre with double-capillary reflective cladding”, 2016), Zhang et al (“Design and Fabrication of a Novel Core-Suspended Optic Fiber for Distributed Gas Sensor”, 2014), and Liu et al (US-20130068384-A1) as applied to claim 47 above and further in view of Tuennermann et al (US-20100304151-A1).
Regarding claim 49, depending from claim 47, Liu does not expressly state that the laser beam transmits through the outer tube to be incident with the inner surface of the secondary capillary tube (Fig. 2). In related laser bonding glass art, Tuennermann teaches that though focusing the laser beam at the interface of the outer tube and primary capillary tube, the laser beam continues to transmit through the capillary tube to be incident with the inner surface of the primary capillary tube (Fig. 1). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention that modified Kosolapov with the radially aligned outer tube, primary capillary tube, and secondary capillary tube would have the directed laser beam transmit through the 3 glass tubes and be incident with the inner surface of the secondary capillary tube because the laser beam is able to transmit through glass material. It has been held that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or are produced by identical or a substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness will be considered to have been established over functional limitations that stem from the claimed structure. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977), In re Spada, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 ( Fed. Cir. 1990). The prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed products. in re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WO-2012077718-A1 teach of stacked glass substrate that are laser weld along a line
US-20140199519-A1 teach of two beams interactively constructively to machine glass
WO-2017032454-A1 teaches of a similar product without elaboration of the method that expressly reads on the instant claims
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2645. The examiner can normally be reached 9am - 5pm Mon-Thurs.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on 571-270-7001. 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.
/STEVEN S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ERIN SNELTING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741