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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 7/11/24 and 6/27/25 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
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.
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(s) 1, 3, 6-9, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (US 2022/0003921 A1).
Re. Claim 1, Takahashi et al. discloses a method for producing a multicore fiber, comprising a method step in which a component group is reshaped to form the multicore fiber or a pre-form 1 for the multicore fiber (e.g., Step S1; Figs. 1 and 3; [[0039]-[0040]), which comprises a hollow cylinder comprising a central bore and a hollow cylinder longitudinal axis (Figs. 2-3; [0041]), which hollow cylinder comprises a cladding glass region 4 made of cladding glass and a plurality of core glass regions 2 provided with a core glass (Fig. 1; [0032]-[0033], and [0041]), wherein at least a part of the central bore is occupied by a glass filling rod 3 comprising a filling rod longitudinal axis and a filling rod outer cladding surface (Fig. 1; [0031]-[0033]), wherein a gap extending in the direction of the filling rod longitudinal axis is produced between the filling rod and the central bore, into which gap a marker element 55 is inserted or which forms the marker element (Fig. 12; [0095]).
However, Takahashi et al. fails to disclose (a) a recess formed in or on the filling rod for housing the marker element such that the marker element is inserted into the recess, and (b) the marker element is formed of marker glass.
Re. (a), Takahashi et al. discloses housing the marker element within a gap between the central bore and the filling rod ([0095]). The softening of the filling rod will inherently create a recess in the outer surface of the filling rod, as it softens around the marker element. But this recess will exist after the softening process, instead of before as required by the claimed invention. That is, Takahashi et al. does not disclose a recess formed in or on the filling rod for housing the marker element such that the marker element is inserted into the recess. The use of recesses to retain elements is common in the cable arts, and one of ordinary skill would have found the claimed recess obvious for the purpose of providing the marker element at a more precise cross-sectional position within the preform. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Re. (b), Takahashi et al. does not provide compositional details of the marker element, aside from requiring its refractive index differ from that of the surrounding cladding ([0083]). Glass is a well-known material capable of refractive index variation through a variety of methods, and one of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to form the marker element of glass material for the purpose of providing a marker capable of achieving the refractive index requirements of Takahashi et al. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Re. Claim 3, Takahashi et al. renders obvious the method as discussed above. Takahashi et al. further discloses the marker element 55 has a length and in that melting (e.g. softening of the filling rod) takes place along at least 80% of this length, preferably along at least 90% of this length, completely, in sections or at certain points (Fig. 12; [0055]). The claim would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date for the reasons discussed above. It is noted the claimed phrase “melting takes place” does not require melting of the marker element, and instead only broadly requires melting in some form to take place over the length of the marker element.
Re. Claim 6, Takahashi et al. renders obvious the method as discussed above. Takahashi et al. further discloses that the marker element 55 is provided in the form of a cylindrical component or in the form of a layer or mass connected to the filling rod (Fig. 12; [0095]). The claim would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date for the reasons discussed above. It is noted the claimed phrase “melting takes place” does not require melting of the marker element, and instead only broadly requires melting in some form to take place over the length of the marker element.
Re. Claim 7, Takahashi et al. renders obvious the method as discussed above. Takahashi et al, failing to disclose a recess, also fails to disclose said recess comprises a bore and/or a longitudinal groove in the outer cladding surface of the filling rod.
Recesses in the form of bores or longitudinal grooves are well known in the art, and one of ordinary skill would have found the claimed recess geometries obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a groove according to well known methods and shapes. “A person of ordinary skill is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton” – ‘[w]hen there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.” KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Re. Claim 8, Takahashi et al. renders obvious the method as discussed above. Takahashi et al. further discloses that the marker element contains a marker material which differs in at least one physical and/or chemical property from the cladding glass and from the glass filling material, wherein the property is selected from: refractive index, color, fluorescence, and/or specific glass density ([0083]). The claim would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 9, Takahashi et al. discloses a semi-finished product for producing a multicore fiber, comprising a hollow cylinder comprising a central bore Figs. 1-3; [[0039]-[0041]), which hollow cylinder comprises a cladding glass region 4 made of cladding glass and a hollow cylinder longitudinal axis, and a plurality of core glass regions 2 provided with a core glass within the cladding glass region (Fig. 1; [0032]-[0033], and [0041]), wherein at least a part of the central bore is occupied by a glass filling rod 3, which comprises a filling rod longitudinal axis and a filling rod outer cladding surface (Fig. 1; [0031]-[0033]), wherein that the filling rod forms a gap which extends in the direction of the filling rod longitudinal axis and into which a marker element 55 is inserted, or which forms the marker element 55 which extends along the central bore longitudinal axis and the filling rod longitudinal axis 55 (Fig. 12; [0095]).
However, Takahashi et al. fails to disclose (a) a recess formed in or on the filling rod for housing the marker element such that the marker element is inserted into the recess, and (b) the marker element is formed of marker glass.
Re. (a), Takahashi et al. discloses housing the marker element within a gap between the central bore and the filling rod ([0095]). The softening of the filling rod will inherently create a recess in the outer surface of the filling rod, as it softens around the marker element. But this recess will exist after the softening process, instead of before as required by the claimed invention. That is, Takahashi et al. does not disclose a recess formed in or on the filling rod for housing the marker element such that the marker element is inserted into the recess. The use of recesses to retain elements is common in the cable arts, and one of ordinary skill would have found the claimed recess obvious for the purpose of providing the marker element at a more precise cross-sectional position within the preform. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Re. (b), Takahashi et al. does not provide compositional details of the marker element, aside from requiring its refractive index differ from that of the surrounding cladding ([0083]). Glass is a well-known material capable of refractive index variation through a variety of methods, and one of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to form the marker element of glass material for the purpose of providing a marker capable of achieving the refractive index requirements of Takahashi et al. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Re. Claim 12, Takahashi et al. renders obvious the semi-finished product as discussed above. Takahashi et al. also discloses the semi-finished product further comprises: the hollow cylinder comprising the central bore, at least two core rods 2 containing the core glass and forming the core glass regions, the filling rod 3 arranged in the central bore (Fig. 1; [0032]-[0033], and [0041]), and at least one marker element 55 placed in the gap formed by the filling rod (Fig. 12; [0095]).
Takahashi et al, failing to disclose a recess, also fails to disclose said recess comprises a bore and/or a longitudinal groove in the outer cladding surface of the filling rod, and the marker being attached in said recess.
Recesses in the form of bores or longitudinal grooves are well known in the art, and one of ordinary skill would have found the claimed recess geometries obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a groove according to well-known methods and shapes. Moreover, attachment of an element within a groove is well-known in the art, and one of ordinary skill would have found the claimed attachment obvious for the purpose of ensuring the marker’s position. “A person of ordinary skill is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton” – ‘[w]hen there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.” KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Re. Claim 13, Takahashi et al. renders obvious the semi-finished product as discussed above. Takahashi et al. also discloses the marker element is present in the form of a cylindrical component or in the form of a layer or mass connected to the filling rod (Fig. 12; [0095]). The claim would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 14, Takahashi et al. renders obvious the semi-finished product as discussed above. Takahashi et al. further discloses that the marker element contains a marker material which differs in at least one physical and/or chemical property from the cladding glass and from the glass filling material, wherein the property is selected from: refractive index, color, fluorescence, and/or specific glass density ([0083]). The claim would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date for the reasons discussed above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-5, 10, 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:
Re. Claim 2, the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest a method as required by the claim, specifically wherein that the marker element extends along the filling rod longitudinal axis and is melted into the recess prior to reshaping to form the pre-form or the multicore fiber.
Re. Claim 4, the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest a method as required by the claim, specifically wherein melting of the marker element comprises a method step in which the filling rod with the horizontally oriented filling rod longitudinal axis is mounted in such a way that the recess is located on an upper side of the filling rod outer cladding surface, wherein the material of the marker element is heated and softened by means of a heat source.
Re. Claim 5, the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest a method as required by the claim, specifically wherein the production of the component group comprises the following method steps:(a) providing the hollow cylinder containing the cladding glass,(b) providing multiple core rods containing the core glass,(c) providing a filling rod comprising a filling rod longitudinal axis and containing the glass filling material,(d) producing the at least one recess on the outer cladding surface of the filling rod, (e) providing the marker element, (f) arranging and melting the marker element into the recess (g) producing core rod bores extending along the hollow cylinder longitudinal axis, (h) introducing the filling rod and the marker element into the central bore, and (i) introducing the core rods into the core rod bores, forming the component group.
Re. Claim 10, the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest a semi-finished product, specifically wherein that the marker element has a length and in that it is melted into the recess, completely, in sections or at points, along at least 80% of this length, preferably along at least 90%.
Re. Claim 11, the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest a semi-finished product, specifically wherein that the marker element comprises a channel filled with a gas.
The most applicable prior art, Takahashi et al. (US 2022/0003921 A1), discussed above, fails to disclose or reasonably suggest the recited invention of the above claims, specifically those portions highlighted above in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to R. PEACE whose telephone number is (571)272-8580. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 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, 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.
/RHONDA S PEACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874 8/10/26
Prosecution Insights