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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Information disclosure statements filed 8/12/2024 and 3/13/2024 have been considered.
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) 1-2, 4-5, 8, 11, 13-14, 16, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0357542 A1 to Cooke et al. (hereinafter “Cooke”).
Regarding claim 1, Cooke discloses a fiber optic cable assembly (Fig. 8) for an equipment rack supporting network equipment, comprising: a fiber optic cable (100) having a distribution end (317), a terminal end (not explicitly labeled but clearly shown as the opposite end in Fig. 8), and a plurality of optical fibers (124, 324, 326) the plurality of optical fibers being terminated at the distribution end by a plurality of distribution connectors (connectors clearly shown in Fig. 7-8); a plurality of distribution housings (i.e. junction shell 322) attached to the fiber optic cable in spaced relation along a length of the fiber optic cable (Fig. 8), wherein each of the plurality of distribution housings comprises: a tubular portion (Fig. 11) having an inlet end (i.e. frontward distribution opening 910/ 1010), an outlet end (i.e. rearward distribution end 912/ 1012), and a first passageway extending between the inlet end and the outlet end (908/ 1008), the first passageway configured to receive at least some of the plurality of optical fibers (Fig. 9C, 9D, 11); at least one branch portion (Fig. 9-10) extending from the tubular portion and having a branch inlet end (Fig. 9-10: branching area is in the middle) coupled to the tubular portion, a branch outlet end (i.e. tap opening 914/ 1014), and a second passageway extending between the branch inlet end and the branch outlet end (Fig. 9-10), the second passageway intersecting and being in communication with the first passageway (Fig. 9-10), and the second passageway configured to receive a subset of the at least some of the plurality of optical fibers received through the inlet end of the tubular portion (Fig. 9C, Fig. 9D), the subset of the at least some of the plurality of optical fibers defining a plurality of tap cables (104), and the plurality of tap cables being terminated by a plurality of tap connectors (314); and at least one bend limiter (932 + 934 / 1030) adjacent the intersection between the first passageway and the second passageway to limit bending of the plurality of tap cables (Fig. 9-10).
Regarding claim 2, Cooke discloses wherein the at least one bend limiter includes a mandrel defining an arcuate surface, the arcuate surface configured to limit bending of the plurality of tap cables (932/ 1030).
Regarding claim 4, Cooke discloses wherein the at least one branch portion has a curved shape, wherein the at least one bend limiter is formed by a curved surface of the branch portion (Fig. 9-10).
Regarding claim 5, Cooke discloses wherein each of the plurality of distribution housings further comprises: a first half shell (900); and a second half shell (1000), wherein the first half shell and the second half shell are connected together to form the distribution housing (Fig. 9-11).
Regarding claim 8, Cooke discloses wherein the first half shell includes at least one projection and the second half shell includes at least one pocket wherein when the first half shell is coupled to the second half shell, the at least one projection is received in the at least one pocket to form at least one mandrel (e.g. 924, 928; see also Fig. 9D).
Regarding claim 11, Cooke discloses wherein the at least one branch portion includes a first branch portion that extends toward the terminal end of the fiber optic cable (Fig. 8).
Regarding claims 13-14, Cooke discloses wherein each of the plurality of distribution housings further comprises at least one movement limiter configured to limit the movement of the distribution housing relative to the fiber optic cable (929 + 932, 934); wherein the at least one movement limiter includes at least one abutment surface on the at least one mandrel (i.e. 929 + 932, 934 contain surfaces that abut optical fiber cable), and wherein the at least one abutment surface is configured to engage an edge of a slot in the fiber optic cable to limit the movement of the distribution housing relative to the fiber optic cable (i.e. Fig. 9C shows 929 + 932, and 934 have stops 938 and 940 to engage surfaces 941 and 942 of the slot 502 of the cable).
Regarding claim 16, Cooke discloses wherein the at least one movement limiter includes friction-creating elements in the first passageway of the tubular portion, and wherein the friction-creating elements are configured to engage with the at least some of the plurality of optical fibers to limit the movement of the distribution housing relative to the fiber optic cable (i.e. ribs 916/ 918/ 920 + 1016/ 1018/ 1020; see also paragraph [0092], [0099]).
Regarding claims 18-20, Cooke discloses a fiber optic cable assembly as already discussed regarding claim 1 above. In addition, Cooke discloses an equipment rack for a fiber optic network (paragraph [0072]), comprising a patch panel arranged in the equipment rack and having a plurality of first connection ports, wherein the plurality of first connection ports is configured to be connected to the fiber optic network (paragraph [0065], [0072]), a plurality of equipment bays defined in the equipment rack, wherein each of the plurality of equipment bays include network equipment defining a plurality of second connection ports (i.e. equipment bays necessarily exist in an equipment rack since the main purpose of an equipment rack is to accommodate various equipment), wherein the plurality of distribution connectors is connected to respective first connection ports in the patch panel, wherein the plurality of tap connectors at each of the plurality of distribution housings is connected to respective second connection ports in at least one equipment bay in the equipment rack, and wherein the fiber optic cable assembly is attached to the equipment rack so that each of the plurality of distribution housings is adjacent to the at least one equipment bay to which its plurality of tap cables is connected; wherein the plurality of tap cables from each of the plurality of distribution housings is connected to respective second connection ports associated with one or two equipment bays in the equipment rack; (such connections necessarily exist in the disclosed device of Cooke, since the optical connections with connection ports in an equipment rack are fundamentally necessary for the proper functioning of the disclosed invention of Cooke).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 3, 7, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cooke.
Regarding claims 3 and 9, Cooke discloses a fiber optic cable assembly according to claim 1 as already discussed above. Although Cooke discloses the bend limiter comprising a mandrel as discussed above, it does not explicitly disclose the bend limiter including a pair of mandrels as claimed in the present application. On the other hand, having a pair of mandrels for limiting the bend of an optical fiber is well known and common in the art. A pair of mandrels are advantageously used in the art since such an arrangement allows for a greater flexibility over the placement of optical fibers within a fiber optic assembly as a pair of mandrels allow for more variability in fiber routing paths compared to a single mandrel. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of Cooke to have the bend limiter comprising a pair of mandrels in the manner claimed in the present application.
Regarding claim 7, Cooke discloses a fiber optic cable assembly according to claim 1 as already discussed above. However, Cooke does not explicitly disclose the first half shell and the second half shell being identical to each other as claimed in the present application. On the other hand, making the housing half shells identical to each other is a well-known feature in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize the advantage of having half shells that are identical to each other, since it would facilitate manufacturing of the housing components and decrease manufacturing costs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of Cooke to have the first half shell and the second half shell to be identical to each other as claimed in the present application.
Claim(s) 6, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cooke in view of US Patent No. 11,467,363 B1 to Clines et al. (hereinafter “Clines”).
Regarding claim 6, Cooke discloses a fiber optic cable assembly according to claim 1 as already discussed above. However, it does not explicitly disclose that the first half shell and the second half shell are pivotally connected and movable between an opened position and a closed position as claimed in the present application. On the other hand, such a pivotal connection is known in the art. Clines discloses a distribution housing (10 in Fig. 4), wherein the first half shell and the second half shell are pivotally connected and movable between an opened position and a closed position (Fig. 1, Fig. 3; col. 3, ll. 61- col. 4, ll. 7). One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize the advantage such a pivotally connected half shells, since it would make the in-situ assembly of the distribution housing easier and faster. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of Cooke to have the first half shell and the second half shell of the distribution housing that are pivotally connected and movable between an opened position and a closed position as claimed in the present application.
Regarding claim 15, Cooke discloses a fiber optic cable assembly according to claim 1 as already discussed above. However, it does not explicitly disclose at least one movement limiter comprising at least one lock pin extending into the passageway of the tubular portion, in the manner claimed. On the other hand, such a lock pin is known in the art. Clines discloses such a movement limiter comprising at least one lock pin extending into the passageway of the tubular portion (151 and 153 in Fig. 5) that limits the movement of the distribution housing relative to the optical fiber cable. One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize such lock pins as advantageous and desirable since they would prevent any undesirable movement or bending of the optical fibers within the distribution housing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of Cooke to have at least one movement limiter comprising at least one lock pin extending into the passageway of the tubular portion, in the manner claimed in the present application.
Claim(s) 10, 12, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cooke in view of US Patent Application Publication No. US 2007/0041695 A1 to Weinert et al. (hereinafter “Weinert”).
Regarding claims 10, 12, Cooke discloses a fiber optic cable assembly according to claim 1 as already discussed above. However, it does not explicitly disclose the at least one branch portion that extends in a perpendicular direction to the tubular portion, or that extends toward the distribution end of the fiber optic cable, in the manner claimed in the present application. On the other hand, such extension directions in a distribution housing is known in the art. For example, Weinert discloses a fiber optic distribution housing having a branch portion that extend in a perpendicular direction to a tubular portion (e.g. Fig. 11 of Weiner), or a branch portion that extends towards the distribution end of the fiber optic cable (e.g. Fig. 8 of Weiner). One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize such extension directions as advantageous and desirable since it would allow optical fiber inlets/outlets of the fiber optic cable assembly to be disposed at desired mid-points of the cable assembly, instead being limited to the distal or terminal ends. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of Cooke to have at least one branch portion that extends in a perpendicular direction to the tubular portion, or that extends toward the distribution end of the fiber optic cable, in the manner claimed in the present application.
Regarding claim 17, Cooke discloses a fiber optic cable assembly according to claim 1 as already discussed above. However, it does not explicitly disclose the distribution housing including at least one connection means for attached the cable assembly to an equipment rack, in the manner claimed. On the other hand, such connection means are known in the art. For example, Weinert discloses the distribution housing including at least one connection means for attaching the cable assembly to an equipment shelf (Fig. 7A of Weinert). One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize the advantage of using such connection means, since they would allow for simple and cost-effective means for securing the cable distribution housing to a stable location within an equipment rack. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of Cooke to have the distribution housing including at least one connection means for attached the cable assembly to an equipment rack, in the manner claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNG H PAK whose telephone number is (571)272-2353. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7AM- 5PM.
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.
/SUNG H PAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874