Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/690,983

CABLE PULLING ARRANGEMENT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 11, 2024
Examiner
SMITH, CHAD
Art Unit
2874
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Commscope Technologies LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
711 granted / 903 resolved
+10.7% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
934
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
44.4%
+4.4% vs TC avg
§102
42.0%
+2.0% vs TC avg
§112
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 903 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3, 4, 8 and 11 are 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: The prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious: wherein the fastener extends through the cable pulling sleeve and the loop; a rip cord extending inside the jacket in the first section, the rip cord extending outside of the jacket at the second section, and the rip cord being configured to cut the jacket and protective wrap. The closest relevant prior art of record, Smith et al. (U.S. PG Pub. # 2013/0016948 A1), teaches that fasteners 114 or 116 extend around the pulling sleeve 104, and a rip cord within 114 or 116, not within the jacket 70 or protective wrap 97. Thus, with no teaching from the prior art, and without the benefit of applicant's teachings, there is no motivation for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine/modify the prior art of record in a manner so as to create the claimed invention. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claims 1, 2, 5, 9, 10, 12 – 15, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Smith et al. (U.S. PG Pub. # 2013/0016948 A1). In Re claims 1, 10 and 14, ‘948 teaches a fiber optic cable assembly, comprising: a fiber optic cable, including: a first section (within 70) having a jacket (70) surrounding at least one internal fiber optic cable (76), the jacket having an end (72); a second section (76 from 72 to where end of 98 or 104 enclose 76) where the at least one internal fiber optic cable extends past the end of the jacket, and the second section having an end (adjacent 76); a strength member (aramid, 82) having a first portion extending inside the jacket (as seen in fig. 16) in the first section, the strength member having a second portion (96) forming a loop outside of the second section, and the strength member having a third portion (wrapped back on 70 where 97 resides, fig. 18) extending outside of the jacket in the first section; and a protective wrap (97) surrounding the third portion of the strength member; and a cable pulling sleeve (98 or 104) coupled to the loop, the cable pulling sleeve defining a cavity for enclosing the end of the second section (figs. 20 or 21A). In Re claims 2 and 5, ‘948 teaches wherein the cable pulling sleeve (104) is coupled to the loop using at least two fasteners (114 and 116). In Re claims 9 and 15, ‘948 teaches wherein the fiber optic cable does not include a fan out arrangement (fig. 21). In Re claim 12, ‘948 teaches wherein the protective wrap includes heat shrink wrap (98, par. 0066). In Re claim 13, ‘948 teaches wherein the protective wrap has a first end that extends past the end of the jacket, the protective wrap has a second end on the jacket, and the third portion of the strength member terminates at the second end of the protective wrap (figs. 19 and 20). In Re claims 18 and 19, ‘948 teaches a method of preparing a fiber optic cable, the method comprising: stripping a jacket (par. 0060, 70) to expose at least one internal fiber optic cable (78) and a strength member (82); looping the strength member to define an anchor point over the exposed at least one internal fiber optic cable (par. 0065), and to have a portion extending outside of the jacket (fig. 18); and applying a protective wrap (86) to surround the portion of the strength member extending outside of the jacket; applying heat to shrink (98, par. 0066) the protective wrap over the portion of the strength member extending outside of the jacket. 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. 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. Claims 6, 7, 16, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (U.S. PG Pub. # 2013/0016948 A1). ‘948 teaches the cable of claims 1, 10 and 18, respectively, but is silent to fiber optic connectors as claimed. However, it is well known in the art to have fiber optic connectors on opposing ends of a fiber optic cable where a jacket has been stripped so as to allow for a cable assembly that is ready to connect to telecom equipment on either end thus creating a more versatile cable assembly. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of ‘948 to have connectors on either end of the jacketed cable so as to have readily available telecom connections for expedient connections as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAD SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-1294. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 5. 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 1-571-272-2397. 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. /CHAD H SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 11, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601951
BEAM-STEERING DEVICE AND METHOD FOR SPATIAL STEERING OF A LIGHT BEAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596220
LIGHT GUIDE PLATE, LIGHT GUIDE PLATE UNIT, AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591152
OPTICAL MODULATOR AND OPTICAL TRANSMISSION DEVICE USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591163
ELECTRO-OPTIC MODULATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12578529
OPTICAL TRANSMITTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
79%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+20.5%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 903 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