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 April 16, 2024 have all been considered and made of record (note the attached copies of form PTO-1449).
Drawings
Thirteen (13) sheets of drawings are accepted by the examiner.
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claim 1 recites “wherein the first ferrule or the second ferrule is movable in any direction perpendicular to the central axis in the holder, and is held by the holder so as not to rotate about the central axis.” However, the specification lacks a description of how this structure achieves perpendicular movement without allowing rotation. Specifically, paragraphs [0044], [0056], [0062], [0074], and [0085–0086] disclose that ferrule S14 rotates around the central axis, contradicting the claim language. It is unclear how the claimed perpendicular movement is achieved without accompanying rotation in holder S7, particularly given that the other ferrule, S13, is described as fixed and immovable.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “wherein the first ferrule or the second ferrule is movable in any direction perpendicular to the central axis in the holder, and is held by the holder so as not to rotate about the central axis” renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear how this perpendicular movement is achieved without facilitating rotation. The specification lacks a description of how this structure achieves perpendicular movement without allowing rotation. Paragraphs [0044], [0056], [0062], [0074], and [0085–0086] disclose ferrule S14 rotates around the central axis, contradicting the claim language. It is unclear how the claimed perpendicular movement is achieved without accompanying rotation in holder S7, particularly given that the other ferrule, S13, is described as fixed and immovable. Accordingly, for the purpose of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “wherein one of the first ferrule and the second ferrule is movable in any direction perpendicular to the central axis in the holder, and another one of the first ferrule and the second ferrule is held by the holder so as not to rotate about the central axis.”
Claims 2-7 inherently contain the indefiniteness of claim 1 as they depend on claim 1.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yazaki et al. (US7331718B2), hereafter Yazaki in view of Kobayashi et al. (US20160259133A1), hereafter Kobayashi.
Regarding claim 1, Yazaki discloses an optical connection device comprising (Figures 10, 11(a) and (b) 14(a) and 19 and related figures and text): a first ferrule (22) in which core centers of one or a plurality of single-core fibers are arranged on an identical circumference from a center in a ferrule cross section (Figure 14(a). Column 10 lines 58-62); a second ferrule (92) in which core centers of a plurality of single-core fibers are arranged on a circumference having the same diameter as a diameter of the circumference on which the core centers of the single-core fibers in the first ferrule are arranged (Figure 20(b) show ferrules (22) and (92). Column 22 lines 1-8), from a center in a ferrule cross section (Column 17 lines 6-15); a cylindrical sleeve (aligning sleeve member (24)) having a hollow portion (Figures 12(a) and (b). Column 11 lines 16-21) into which the first ferrule and the second ferrule are inserted so that a central axis of the first ferrule and a central axis of the second ferrule match each other (Figure 19), and having a predetermined gap between outer diameters of the first ferrule and the second ferrule and an inner diameter of the hollow portion so that the first ferrule or the second ferrule is rotatable (Although Yazaki does not explicitly disclose this gap, the described ability to displace the ferrule parallel to the holding channel indicates a gap exists between the sleeve and the ferrule. Column 3 lines 15-18); a spring (128) that applies pressure to a first flange (108) of the first ferrule or a second flange of the second ferrule so that a distal end portion of the first ferrule and a distal end portion of the second ferrule abut on each other (Figure 10. Column 22 lines 17-23); and a holder (Figure 10. Adapter 170) that holds the first ferrule (22), the second ferrule (92), the cylindrical sleeve (aligning sleeve 24), the first flange (ring-shaped flange 108), the second flange (ring-shaped flange 66), and the spring (128) such that the central axis of the first ferrule and the central axis of the second ferrule match each other (Figure 10. Column 17 lines 6-15). Yazaki further discloses ferrule (22) is secured/fixed to a predetermined position (col. 9, lines 62-66) but fails to disclose the ferrule (92) is movable in any direction perpendicular to the central axis in the holder.
Kobayashi teaches the ferrule (23) is inserted into a split sleeve (25) to connect fibers each other, positions of the X, Y axes can be flexibly moved (Par. [0039]).
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 holder of Yazaki to hold the ferrules such that they are movable in any direction perpendicular to the central axis, as taught by Kobayashi, in order to facilitate precise optical coupling of multi-core fibers while maintaining alignment and preventing unwanted rotational misalignment between the fibers.
Regarding claim 2, Yazaki/Kobayashi discloses the optical connection device of claim 1. Yazaki further disclose the first ferrule(22) and the second ferrule (92) each have a distal end portion having a convex shape protruding toward the central axis(figures 20(a) and 20(b)), an end portion of the first ferrule includes the distal end portion having the convex shape, and an annular portion that is arranged on an outer periphery of the distal end portion and from which end surfaces of the single-core fibers arranged in the first ferrule are exposed, an end portion of the second ferrule includes the distal end portion having the convex shape, and an annular portion that is arranged on an outer periphery of the distal end portion and from which end surfaces of the single-core fibers arranged in the second ferrule are exposed, and the distal end portion of the first ferrule and the distal end portion of the second ferrule are abutted on each other (figures 21).
PNG
media_image1.png
500
896
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Yazaki/Kobayashi discloses the optical connection device of claim 1. Yazaki further disclose the distal end portion of the first ferrule and the distal end portion of the
second ferrule have flat surfaces perpendicular to the central axis (Figure 21(a). abutting end faces 46 and 136).
Regarding claim 4, Yazaki/Kobayashi discloses the optical connection device of claim 1. Yazaki further discloses an angle formed by the flat surfaces of the distal end portions and the annular portions in the first ferrule and the second ferrule is 5 degrees or more (Figure 20(b). Column 25 lines 46-50).
Regarding claim 5, Yazaki/Kobayashi discloses the optical connection device of claim 1. Yazaki further discloses a gap between end surfaces of the single-core fibers exposed to the annular portion of the first ferrule and end surfaces of the single-core fibers exposed to the annular portion of the second ferrule whose optical axis match an optical axis of the single-core fibers of the first ferrule (Figure 21(a) and 21(b)) While Yazaki fails disclose a gap that is explicitly 20 μm or less, limiting this gap to 20 μm or less is a results of an effective design choice.
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to set the gap to a functional, small distance to ensure efficient light transmission between the aligned fibers (i.e., to reduce connection loss (col. 25; lines 33-36)), as is customary in the field of optical connections.
Regarding claim 6, Yazaki/Kobayashi discloses the optical connection device of claim 1. Yazaki further discloses in the holder, the first ferrule or the second ferrule is movable in a direction parallel to the central axis (Column 3 lines 15-18).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yazaki et al. (US7331718B2), hereafter Yazaki, and Kobayashi et al. (US20160259133A1), hereafter Kobayashi. in further in view of Naganuma et al. (JPH0282212A), hereafter Naganuma.
Regarding claim 7, Yazaki discloses an optical switch (Column 23 lines 31-34) comprising: the optical connection device according to claim 1; Yazaki fails to disclose a rotation mechanism that rotates one of the first ferrule and the second ferrule of the optical connection device about the central axis.
Naganuma teaches an optical switch device that alters the light path by rotating one ferrule relative to another. Figure 2 illustrates Ferrule 28 is inserted in block 27 slidably [so that rotation is possible] in the direction of a rotation axis. A cam and rotation mechanism or a rotation mechanism using a stepping motor is employed as a means for rotating one ferrule and determining its position.
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the optical switch of Yazaki with the rotation mechanism of Naganuma to achieve precise alignment of the optical path, as Naganuma teaches that such a mechanism provides improved, accurate, and predictable control over the optical connection. Therefore, it would have been an obvious design choice to substitute or add the known rotation mechanism of Naganuma into the device of Yazaki to achieve the functionality recited in claim 7
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