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
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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ivancevic USPGPub No. 2006/0269207 in view of Jones et al. (US Patent No. 4,840,450, from hereinafter “Jones”).
Regarding claims 1, 7-9, and 10-13, Ivancevic teaches a stand assembly (vertical mounting channels 30 of information technology cabinet 10) for fiber optic cables, comprising: a base plate (bottom 16); a mount coupled to the base plate and configured to extend above an upper surface of the base plate; a post extending away from the mount (conduit 44); and a vise assembly (mounting brackets 100) coupled to the base plate and being below the semi-circular support. Further regarding claims 10-13, Ivancevic teaches a method of attaching an enclosure to a stand assembly, comprising: obtaining a stand assembly in claim 1; rotating the enclosure relative to the base plate; inserting the post through an aperture in a bracket on the enclosure; rotating the enclosure about the post such that an opening of the enclosure raises into contact with a lower surface of the semi-circular support; and adjusting the vise assembly, further in claim 11, wherein the vise assembly is adjusted by translating it relative to the base plate. Additionally, in claim 12, wherein the vise assembly is adjusted by opening and closing the vise assembly and regarding claim 13, further comprising: removing the mount from the base plate (see Figures 1-4, paragraphs 26-35, description of figure 4, figure 4 not shown in Ivancevic).
Regarding claims 1 and 7-9, Ivancevic fails to specifically teach a semi-circular support coupled to a distal end of the mount below the post; additionally claim 7, wherein the post has a planar off set from semi-circular support; further regarding claim 8, a surface plate configured to locate the post and semi-circular support on a distal end of the mount and further regarding claim 9, wherein the post and the semi-circular support are coupled to the mount at different locations.
Jones teaches an apparatus for optical fiber end positioning which comprises seat 200 includes a first surface 202 which adjoins a planar seating surface 204. A portion of the seating surface is bounded by a substantially planar ledge 206 which is perpendicular to the seating surface. With positioner 160 oriented as described above, the seating surface is perpendicular to the z-direction and the surface of the ledge is parallel to both the x- and z-directions. The ledge portion includes a groove 208 having a semicircular cross section and extending from a base at seating surface 204 to first surface 202. An axis of the groove is parallel to the z-direction. The diameter of the groove is selected to slightly exceed the diameter of the optical fiber to be positioned, e.g. by 0.002 inches or less, so that the fiber substantially fits in the groove. It is noted that in practice, as disclosed in the above incorporated patents, the end of fiber 114 is prepared for laser beam injection by stripping the jacket and cladding away from the fiber core along a portion of the fiber terminating at the end being injected. This detail is not illustrated in the Figures. However, where the mechanical seat groove diameter is described relative to fiber diameter, it is the diameter of the fiber core that is the pertinent dimension. A circular portion 210 (partially shown by a broken line in FIG. 2) of the seating surface is allocated for seating a fiber end, during positioning, when the fiber end is at the aligned location for laser beam injection. With the fiber so aligned, the fiber substantially lies in the groove since the fiber end portion is coaxial with the beam axis which, in turn, defines the z-direction. As noted above, the groove axis is also parallel to the z-direction. In FIG. 2, an end 212 of fiber 114 is shown aligned with portion 210 but, for clarity, spaced therefrom along the z-direction (see Figure 2, col 7, lines 12-45). Hence, in the same field of endeavor there is an optical fiber apparatus which utilizes a semicircle shaped item.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a semicircular support so that the item fits well into the apparatus so that the system can operate efficiently, as a semi-circle is able to be positioned more easily.
Regarding claim 2, Ivancevic teaches wherein the mount is removable from the base plate (see paragraph 9 when it is taught that the mounting brackets can adjustably attach parts).
Regarding claim 3, Ivancevic teaches wherein the vise assembly is configured to translate along the upper surface of the base plate (see Figure 4).
Regarding claim 4, Ivancevic teaches wherein the base plate includes a plurality of brackets having an elevated central portion (mounting brackets see paragraph 9).
Regarding claim 5, Ivancevic teaches wherein the vise assembly includes a bar (front flange 24) configured to translate between the elevated central portion and the upper surface of the base plate (see Fig 1, paragraph 26).
Regarding claim 6, Ivancevic teaches wherein a position of the vise assembly relative to the mount is adjustable (see paragraph 9 when it is taught that the mounting brackets can adjustably attach parts).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US Patent No. 8,565,572 to Krampotich and US Patent No. 9,341,802 to Kramptioch.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA M CAPUTO whose telephone number is (571)272-2388. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 EST.
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.
/LISA M CAPUTO/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874