DETAILED ACTION
This is the third office action for US Application 18/604,821 for Devices, Systems, and Methods for Securing Cables.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desard et al. in view of US 4,347,998 to Loree. Regarding claim 16, Desard et al. discloses an enclosure (200) and a device (see figure 1) mounted within the enclosure. The device comprises a first portion (104) and a second portion (102) that is movable between an open position and a closed position with respect to the first portion. There is a support (114) positioned within the first portion or the second portion, wherein the support enables differently sized cables to be secured between the first portion and the second portion when the second portion is in the closed position. There are one or more cables disposed within the device such that the one or more cables are secured in a desired position within the enclosure when the second portion of the device is in the closed position.
Desard et al. does not disclose the support as being a foam support cushion that enables compression of the foam support cushion to enable differently sized cables to be secured between the first portion and the second portion. Loree provides a teaching for providing a foam support cushion (40) between first (10) and second (12) portions of a cable support enclosure to enable differently sized cables to be secured between the first portion and the second portion. Because both Desard et al. and Loree disclose supports for securing cable within a first and second portion of an enclosure, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have substituted one support for the other to achieve the predictable result of a foam support cushion in the enclosure of Desard et al.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desard et al. in view of US 4,347,998 to Loree, and in further view of US 5,564,163 to Barnett. Regarding claim 17, the enclosure of Desard et al. includes a fiber management tray (260). Desard et al. in view of Loree does not disclose the device as comprising an attachment clip disposed on a bottom side of the first portion such that the device is mountable to a fiber management tray. Barnett discloses a device or securing one or more cables, comprising a second portion (16) that is movable between an open position and a closed position with respect to a first portion (14). There is an attachment clip (18) on a bottom side of the first portion to mount the device to an aperture in a support.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided an attachment clip on the bottom of the first portion of the device taught by Desard et al. in view of Loree, and an aperture in the support tray, to mount the device to the support tray as taught by Barnett.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 7, 8, 11, 14, 15, and 20 are allowed. Claims 18 and 19 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: See pages 7-10 of Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filed on 18 March 2026.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN M MARSH whose telephone number is (571)272-6819. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9 am-7:30 pm.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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 M. MARSH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3632
/STEVEN M MARSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights