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
The prior art documents submitted by applicant in the Information Disclosure Statements filed on November 13, 2024 have all been considered and made of record (note the attached copies of form PTO-1449).
Drawings
Eight (8) sheets of drawings were files on March 21, 2024.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: ‘18' in Figure 1. ‘344’ in Figure 3. ‘306’ in Figure 6. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant
may become aware in the specification.
Inventorship
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 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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pepe (US7074066B2).
Regarding claim 1, Pepe discloses a connector assembly (Figure 4), the connector assembly comprising: a shroud (8) forming an outer body configured to dispose around an optical cable (fiber connector assembly (6) extends through cavity (18). Column 2 lines 4-5), the shroud forming a slot (Channel 34); an alignment collar (10) forming an arcuate sector (Arcuate in this case is interpreted to be an arc shaped structure consistent with the shape of the rotatable collar (10) because it conforms to the curved inner wall the cylindrical member, forming a portion of a circular arc), the alignment collar comprising a collar wall extending into the slot at the shroud (Element 70 is reasonably interpreted as the collar wall because it protrudes radially from the body of the collar (10) that is positioned for engagement within the slot of the shroud (8). Figure 3. Column 5 lines 16-23), wherein the alignment collar forms a receiving area configured to receive a telecommunications connector (When 10 and 8 are connected, they form a completed receiving area, channel 34, to receive the inner fiber connector assembly (6)), and wherein the alignment collar is configured to move within the slot at the shroud as the shroud is rotated (Column 5 lines 16-23. Although Pepe discloses rotation of the collar relative to the shroud, such rotation necessarily causes relative movement between the collar and shroud, and therefore satisfies the claimed limitation, since relative rotation between components produces the same functional engagement regardless of which component is actively driven); and a latch actuator (cam member 60) coupled to the shroud (Elements 8 and 10 rotatable connect together. In paragraph [0019] of the present application, the applicant defines “coupled” as referring to both direct coupling, fixing, or attaching, as well as indirect coupling, fixing, or attaching through one or more intermediate components or features), the latch actuator comprising a latch cam (camming lobe 66), wherein the latch cam is configured to bias a latch (114) at the telecommunications connector to an unlock position when the latch actuator is rotated by the shroud (Column 5 lines 48-54. Pepe disclosure of the rotating collar (10) results in relative rotation between the collar and shroud, which is functionally equivalent to rotating the shroud relative to the collar and therefore satisfies the claimed limitation).
Regarding Claim 2, Pepe discloses the connector assembly of claim 1. Pepe further discloses the latch cam (camming lobe 66) forms a ramp (leading end 64), wherein the ramp at the latch cam is configured to gradually depress the latch at the telecommunications connector when the shroud is rotated (Column 5 lines 48-54. Pepe disclosure of the rotating collar (10) results in relative rotation between the collar and shroud, which is functionally equivalent to rotating the shroud relative to the collar and therefore satisfies the claimed limitation).
Regarding Claim 6, Pepe discloses the connector assembly of claim 1. Pepe further discloses latch actuator comprises an actuator wall extending into the slot at the shroud. Pepe discloses the shroud (8) is integrally formed with the collar (10) (column 4 lines 4-7) with a wall (70) extending radially from the collar (10) and received within the slot (34) of the shroud (8). Because the latch actuator (60) and the collar (10) form a unitary rotation latch actuator structure, the wall (70) constitutes an actuator wall extending into the slot (34) at the shroud (8).
Regarding Claim 7, Pepe discloses the connector assembly of claim 1. Pepe further disclose shroud (8) forming a bayonet slot (34), wherein an angular extension of the bayonet slot (34) corresponds to the latch cam (66) relative to the latch cam depressing the latch (114) at the telecommunications connector (6) when the shroud is rotated. A bayonet slot is interpreted as a circumferential slot with angular travel limits and engagement features. Pepe discloses a slot (34) extending circumferentially around the shroud (8), a key-way opening (32) with leading ramp (40) and a locking stop surface (42). The angular length of the slot (34) defines the rotational travel of collar (10). The same rotation travel defines how the latch cam (66) depresses the latch (114). So, the angular extend of the slot corresponds directly to the angular movement needed to actuate the latch. Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pepe (US7074066B2).
Regarding Claim 3, Pepe discloses the connector assembly claim 1. Pepe further discloses the alignment collar (10) and the latch actuator (60). Pepe fails to disclose alignment collar and latch actuator form separate components from one another.
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to design the alignment collar and latch actuator to be separate components from one another as a matter of routine design choice since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70
Regarding Claim 4, Pepe discloses the connector assembly of claim 1. Pepe further discloses the latch actuator (60) and the shroud (8) form separate components from one another (Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 5, Pepe discloses the connector assembly of claim 1. Pepe further discloses an anti-rotation feature (locking latch portion (38) and locking stop surface (42)) configure to fix the latch actuator relative to the shroud as the shroud is rotated. The locking latch portion and the locking stop surface function to restrict rotational movement and define a rotational limit relative to the shroud (8). Accordingly, the locking latch portion and the locking stop surface constitute an anti-rotation wall configured to fix the latch actuator (60) relative to the shroud during rotation.
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.
Claims 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pepe (US7074066B2) view of Lu et al. (US12061366B2), hereafter Lu.
Regarding Claim 8, Pepe discloses a connector assembly (Figure 4), the connector assembly comprising: a first shroud (8) forming an outer body configured to dispose around the optical cable (fiber connector assembly (6) extends through cavity (18). Column 2 lines 4-5), the first shroud forming a slot (Channel 34) extending substantially along a circumferential direction (Figure 3); an alignment collar (10) comprising an arcuate sector and a collar wall sector (Arcuate in this case is interpreted to be an arc shaped structure consistent with the shape of the rotatable collar (10) because it conforms to the curved inner wall the cylindrical member, forming a portion of a circular arc. (Element 70 is reasonably interpreted as the collar wall because it protrudes radially from the body of the collar (10) that is positioned for engagement within the slot of the shroud (8). Figure 3. Column 5 lines 16-23), wherein the collar wall (70) extends into the slot (34) at the first shroud (Element 70 is positioned for engagement within the slot of the shroud (8). Figure 3. Column 5 lines 16-23), and wherein the alignment collar (10) comprises a receiving area configured to receive a first fiber optic connector at which an optical cable is received (When 10 and 8 are connected, they form a completed receiving area, channel 34, to receive the inner fiber connector assembly (6)), wherein the alignment collar is configured to move within the slot at the first shroud as the first shroud is rotated (Column 5 lines 16-23. Although Pepe discloses rotation of the collar relative to the shroud, such rotation necessarily causes relative movement between the collar and shroud, and therefore satisfies the claimed limitation, since relative rotation between components produces the same functional engagement regardless of which component is actively driven); and a latch actuator (Cam member 60) coupled to the first shroud (Elements 8 and 10 rotatable connect together. In paragraph [0019] of the present application, the applicant defines “coupled” as referring to both direct coupling, fixing, or attaching, as well as indirect coupling, fixing, or attaching through one or more intermediate components or features), the latch actuator comprising a latch cam (camming love 66) configured to bias a latch (114) at the fiber optic connector to an unlock position when the latch actuator is rotated by the shroud (Column 5 lines 48-54. Pepe disclosure of the rotating collar (10) results in relative rotation between the collar and shroud, which is functionally equivalent to rotating the shroud relative to the collar and therefore satisfies the claimed limitation). Pepe fails to disclose a slot along an interior wall of the first shroud.
Lu teaches a fiber optic adapter with an outer retaining sleeve with plurality of slot (Figure 4. recesses 42) within the interior of the sleeve.
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the connector assembly of Pepe to form the slots along interior wall providing guided rotation engagement between mating components. Such a modification merely relocates a known slot from an exterior wall to an interior wall while maintaining the same function of guiding angular movement and cam actuation and therefore represents a predictable variation using known technique to achieve the same result.
Regarding claim 9, Pepe/Lu disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe further discloses the latch cam (camming lobe 66) forms a ramp (leading end 64), and wherein the ramp at the latch cam is configured to gradually depress the latch at the fiber optic connector when the first shroud is rotated. (Column 5 lines 48-54. Pepe disclosure of the rotating collar (10) results in relative rotation between the collar and shroud, which is functionally equivalent to rotating the shroud relative to the collar and therefore satisfies the claimed limitation).
Regarding claim 10, Pepe/Lu disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe further discloses the alignment collar (10) and the latch actuator (60). Pepe fails to disclose alignment collar and latch actuator form separate components from one another.
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to design the alignment collar and latch actuator to be separate components from one another as a matter of routine design choice since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70
Regarding claim 11, Pepe/Lu disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe further discloses an anti- rotation feature (locking latch portion (38) and locking stop surface (42)) extending substantially co-directional to an extension of the optical cable into the connector assembly (Figure 3), wherein the anti-rotation wall is configured to fix the latch actuator relative to the first shroud as the first shroud is rotated. The locking latch portion and the locking stop surface function to restrict rotational movement and define a rotational limit relative to the shroud (8). Accordingly, the locking latch portion and the locking stop surface constitute an anti-rotation wall configured to fix the latch actuator (60) relative to the shroud during rotation.
Regarding claim 12, Pepe/Lue disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe further discloses latch actuator comprises an actuator wall extending into the slot at the shroud. Pepe discloses the shroud (8) is integrally formed with the collar (10) (column 4 lines 4-7) with a wall (70) extending radially from the collar (10) and received within the slot (34) of the shroud (8). Because the latch actuator (60) and the collar (10) form a unitary rotation latch actuator structure, the wall (70) constitutes an actuator wall extending into the slot (34) at the shroud (8).
Regarding claim 13, Pepe/Lue disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe further discloses wherein the actuator wall and the collar wall each extend radially outward into the slot at the first shroud. Pepe discloses the shroud (8) is integrally formed with the collar (10) (column 4 lines 4-7) with a wall (70) extending radially from the collar (10) and received within the slot (34) of the shroud (8). Because the latch actuator (60) and the collar (10) form a unitary rotation latch actuator structure, the wall (70) constitutes an actuator wall extending into the slot (34) at the shroud (8).
Regarding claim 14, Pepe/Lue disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe further discloses the actuator wall and the collar wall each extend into the same slot at the first shroud. Pepe discloses the shroud (8) is integrally formed with the collar (10) (column 4 lines 4-7) with a wall (70) extending radially from the collar (10) and received within the slot (34) of the shroud (8). Because the latch actuator (60) and the collar (10) form a unitary rotation latch actuator structure, the wall (70) constitutes an actuator wall extending into the slot (34) at the shroud (8).
Regarding claim 15, Pepe/Lue disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe further discloses an opening is formed along a direction of rotation between the latch actuator (60) and the front housing portion (12). Pepe fails to disclose an opening between the latch actuator and the alignment collar.
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to design the alignment collar and latch actuator to be separate components from one another as a matter of routine design choice since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pepe (US7074066B2) and Lu et al. (US12061366B2), hereafter Lu as applied to claim8 above, and further in view of Cheng (US10890722B2).
Regarding Claim 16, Pepe/Lu disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe further discloses a fiber optic connector (Figure 4) configured to receive the optical cable, wherein the shroud is configured to dispose around the first fiber optic connector (When 10 and 8 are connected, they form a completed receiving area, channel 34, to receive the inner fiber connector assembly (6)). Pepe/Lu fails to disclose a second fiber optic connector configured to output one or more optical fibers; a second shroud configured to dispose around the second fiber optic connector; and a fiber optic coupler configured to operably couple the first fiber optic connector and the second fiber optic connector.
Cheng teaches first and second fiber shrouded optic cable connectors (Figure 4. 202 and 204. Column 2 lines 22-31). The first fiber optic cable connector (202) configured to output an optical fiber (172). The second fiber optic cable connector (204) configured to receive the optical cable (139). A fiber optic coupler (230A and 230B) configured to operably couple the first (202) and second (204) fiber optic connector (Column 9 lines 10-15).
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the connector assembly of Pepe/Lu with the first and second fiber optic cable connectors of Cheng as a matter of predictable use of known elements to permit interconnection of two fiber optic connectors without altering the underlying rotational cam actuation mechanism.
Regarding claim 17, Pepe/Lu disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe further discloses a fiber optic connector (Figure 4). Pepe fails to disclose a bulkhead disposed between the first fiber optic connector and a second fiber optic connector.
Cheng teaches a bulkhead (Bulkhead adapter 250) disposed between the first fiber optic connector (202) and a second fiber optic connector (204. Figure 4).
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the connector assembly of Pepe with a bulkhead and first and second fiber optic connector of Cheng. Such modification merely applies a known fiber optic bulkhead coupling arrangement to Pepe’s connector system without altering the rotational cam or latch actuation mechanism, yielding predictable results.
Regarding claim 18, Pepe/Lu disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe further discloses the first shroud forming a bayonet slot, wherein an angular extension of the bayonet slot corresponds to the latch cam relative to the latch cam depressing the latch at a first fiber optic connector when the first shroud is rotated. A bayonet slot is interpreted as a circumferential slot with angular travel limits and engagement features. Pepe discloses a slot (34) extending circumferentially around the shroud (8), a key-way opening (32) with leading ramp (40) and a locking stop surface (42). The angular length of the slot (34) defines the rotational travel of collar (10). The same rotation travel defines how the latch cam (66) depresses the latch (114). So, the angular extend of the slot corresponds directly to the angular movement needed to actuate the latch.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pepe (US7074066B2) and Lu et al. (US12061366B2), hereafter Lu as applied to claim8 above, and further in view of Barthes et al (US11927810B2), hereafter Barthes.
Regarding Claim 19, Pepe/Lu disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe/Lu fail to disclose an enclosure.
Barthes discloses an enclosure (Figure 1. Closure 200) for a telecommunication system (Column 1 lines 23-25), the enclosure comprising: a housing forming ports configured to receive one or more connector assemblies (Column 5 lines 53-55).
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to house the connector assembly of Pepe/Lu within the enclosure taught by Barthes. Incorporating the two elements represents predictable use of known elements according to their established functions to provide mechanical protection and organization of fiber optic connections, without alter the operation of Pepe/Lu’s connector assembly.
Regarding claim 20, Pepe/Lu disclose the connector assembly of claim 8. Pepe/Lu/ Barthes fail to disclose the enclosure comprising a connection density of connector assemblies at the housing greater than 0.25 connector assemblies per square inch.
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to configure the enclosure with such connector density as a matter of routine design choice, since connection density in telecommunications enclosures is a result-effective variable determined by available house area and desired port capacity. Selecting a density greater than 0.25 connector assemblies per square inch represents an obvious optimization of a known parameter to accommodate increase connector count, yielding predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAJANAE N GREEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2188. The examiner can normally be reached Tues-Fri. 5:30a-3:30p.
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.
/TAJANAE NICOLE GREEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/UYEN CHAU N LE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874