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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
This is an AIA application filed June 26, 2024.
Special Definitions for Claim Language - MPEP § 2111.01(IV)
No special definitions as defined by MPEP § 2111.01(IV) are seen as present in the specification regarding the language used in the claims. Consequently, the words and phrases of the claims are given their plain meaning. MPEP §§ 2173.01, 2173.05(a), and 2111.01.
If special definitions are present, Applicant should bring those to the attention of the examiner and the prosecution history with its next response in a manner both specific and particular. In doing so, there will be no mistake, confusion, and/or ambiguity as to what constitutes the special definition(s). Per above, such special definitions must conform to the requirements of MPEP § 2111.01(IV).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230288631 of Sakuma et al. (Sakuma I).
Please note that Sakuma I is the US counterpart to WO 2022/097639 A1 published May 12, 2022 and cited in the written opinion for related application PCT/JP2024/016999.
With respect to claim 1, Sakuma I discloses a multicore optical fiber made of silica-based glass (Fig. 1, ¶ 32, "The plurality of core portions 11 are made of silica (SiO2) glass."), comprising:
a plurality of cores (core portions 11) containing one or more kinds of elements among an alkali metal element group ("One or more core portions 11 among the plurality of core portions 11 includes one or more alkali metal elements selected from the group of lithium, sodium, potassium, and rubidium.") consisting of an alkali metal element and alkaline-earth metal element; and
a cladding that surrounds the plurality of cores ("a cladding portion 12 covering each of the plurality of core portions 11"), and
has a refractive index lower than a refractive index of the plurality of cores (inherent for optical fibers in order to retain the light in the core(s); ¶ 34, "The cladding portion 12 has a refractive index lower than the refractive index of the core portion 11."),
wherein all adjacent first cores and second cores among the plurality of cores have refractive indexes different from each other (¶ 45, "In the plurality of cores 21, for example, additive materials are the same as each other, but may be different from each other."), and
a difference between a maximum value and a minimum value of a transmission loss of the plurality of cores at a wavelength of 1550 nm is 0.005 db/km or less (same product/same features – see below).
For product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties and/or functions are presumed to be inherent. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). MPEP § 2112.01(I).
Consequently, because Sakuma I as set forth above provides the structure of claim 1, the combination is seen as also providing the same claimed properties or functions of claim 1.
Unsupported features are seen to directly result from the supported/claimed structures. No authority is known by which unsupported or “naked” functions/characteristics/features can be claimed and subject to exclusive protection.
Below, this analysis is referred to as “same product/same features”.
With respect to claim 2, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 1, including one wherein
the all adjacent first cores and second cores among the plurality of cores have a relative refractive index difference in which an absolute value of a difference between a relative refractive index difference of the first core with respect to the cladding and a relative refractive index difference of the second core with respect to the cladding is 0.01% or more.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claim 3, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 1, including one wherein
at least one of the all adjacent first cores and second cores among the plurality of cores contains chlorine and fluorine (¶ 33, "Each core portion 11 further includes a halogen element. Each core portion 11 may include only Cl (chlorine) or may include Cl and F (fluorine) as the halogen element.") so that a chlorine concentration is smaller than a fluorine concentration (seen as within the scope of Sakuma I as one of several available embodiments), and
when a larger value between rf1 and rf2 is set as rfmax and a smaller value is set as rfmin in a case where a ratio rf1=cf1/ca1 between a mass fraction cf1 of fluorine and a mass fraction ca1 of the alkali metal element group in the first core and a ratio rf2=cf2/ca2 between a mass fraction cf2 of fluorine and a mass fraction ca2 of the alkali metal element group in the second core are different from each other, and
rf1 is set as rfmax and rf2 is set as rfmin in a case where rf1 and rf2 are equal to each other,
rfmax/rfmin is 2.5 or less.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claim 4, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 3, wherein rfmax/rfmin is 2.0 or less.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claimS 5 and 6, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 3, wherein rfmax/rfmin is 1.5 or less and wherein rfmax/rfmin is 1.1 or more.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claim 7, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 3, including one wherein
a concentration of the alkali metal element group in each of the plurality of cores is from 3 ppm to 300 ppm in terms of mass fraction.
¶ 27, "An average mass fraction of alkali metal elements in the low refractive index barrier may be 0.2 ppm or more 500 ppm or less."
With respect to claim 8, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 3, including one wherein
a fluorine concentration in each of the plurality of cores is from 200 ppm to 2500 ppm in terms of mass fraction.
¶ 33, "By setting the mass fraction (hereinafter referred to as “concentration”) of the halogen element in each core portion 11 to 100 ppm or more 20000 ppm or less, MCF 20A with low transmission loss can be obtained without causing the above-described problem."
With respect to claim 9, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 1, including one wherein
each of the plurality of cores contains chlorine and fluorine so that a chlorine concentration is larger than a fluorine concentration (per claim 3, above), and
when a larger value between rc1 and rc2 is set as rcmax and a smaller value is set as rcmin in a case where a ratio rc1=cc1/ca1 between a mass fraction cc1 of chlorine and a mass fraction ca1 of the alkali metal element group in the first core and a ratio
rc2=cc2/ca2 between a mass fraction cc2 of chlorine and a mass fraction ca2 of the alkali metal element group in the second core are different from each other, and
rc1 is set as rcmax and rc2 is set as rcmin in a case where rc1 and rc2 are equal to each other, rcmax/rcmin is 2.5 or less.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claims 10, 11, and 12, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 9, including one wherein
rcmax/rcmin is 2.0 or less;
rcmax/rcmin is 1.5 or less; and
rcmax/rcmin is 1.1 or more.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claim 13, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 9, including one wherein
a concentration of the alkali metal element group in each of the plurality of cores is from 3 ppm to 750 ppm in terms of mass fraction.
¶ 27, "An average mass fraction of alkali metal elements in the low refractive index barrier may be 0.2 ppm or more 500 ppm or less.” See claim 7, above.
With respect to claim 14, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 9, including one wherein
a chlorine concentration in each of the plurality of cores is more than 0 ppm and 12000 ppm or less in terms of mass fraction.
¶ 33, "By setting the mass fraction (hereinafter referred to as “concentration”) of the halogen element in each core portion 11 to 100 ppm or more 20000 ppm or less, MCF 20A with low transmission loss can be obtained without causing the above-described problem.” See claim 8, above.
With respect to claim 15, Sakuma I as set forth above discloses the multicore optical fiber according to claim 1, including one wherein
each of the plurality of cores contains one or more kinds of elements among sodium, potassium, rubidium, cesium, and calcium as the alkali metal element group.
¶ 35, "The low refractive index barrier portion 13 includes one or more alkali metal elements selected from the group consisting of lithium, sodium, potassium, and rubidium. The type of the alkali metal element included in the low refractive index barrier portion 13 may be the same as or different from the type of the alkali metal element included in the core portion 11."
Conclusion
Applicant’s publication US 20260153668 A1 published June 4, 2026 is cited.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references have elements related to Applicant’s disclosure and/or claims or are otherwise associated with the other cited references, particularly with respect to multicore fibers with varied parameters and related devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW JORDAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1571. The examiner can normally be reached most days 1000-1800 PACIFIC TIME ZONE (messages are returned).
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. While examiner does not examine over the phone (see 37 C.F.R. § 1.2), examiner is glad to clarify or discuss issues so long as it forwards prosecution.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas (Tom) HOLLWEG can be reached at (571) 270-1739. 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.
/Andrew Jordan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
V: (571) 270-1571 (Pacific time)
F: (571) 270-2571
June 8, 2026
Prosecution Insights