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 June 24, 2025 and June 17, 2025 have all been considered and made of record (note the attached copies of form PTO-1449).
Drawings
Seven (7) sheets of drawings were filed on June 24, 2024.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, a third guide opening between the second receiving hole and the third receiving hole as required by claim 9 in an embodiment where the first receiving hole is in communication with the second receiving hole through the second guide opening as required by independent claim 8 from which claim 9 depends must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Additional discussion of the features in question is provided in the 35 U.S.C. § 112 section below.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: third receiving hole (claim 9), third guide opening (claim 9).
Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 9 is 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.
Claim 9 depends from claim 8. For clarity, the examiner is providing an annotated version of Figure 2 of the present application below. The examiner believes that Figure 2 illustrates the embodiment defined by claim 8. If this is not true as understood by Applicant, then a detailed explanation is required.
PNG
media_image1.png
364
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As described in the specification (see paragraph 40 of the publication of this application, US 2024/0345346 A1) and labeled by Applicant, Figure 2 illustrates receiving holes 611, guide openings 612, and secondary guide openings 613, wherein the secondary guide openings 613 are in communication with two receiving holes 611.
The specification does not identify third and fourth receiving holes. However, it is evident in Figure 2 that four receiving holes 611 are present.
Independent claim 8 requires that “the first receiving hole is in communication with the second receiving hole through the second guide opening” in lines 9-10 of the claim. This can be see in Figure 2 of the present application as annotated above. The examiner notes that any bottom hole 611 may be a first hole and any corresponding top hole 611 may be a second hole, wherein the secondary guide opening 613 there-between communicates with both the corresponding holes 611.
Claim 9, which is dependent from claim 8, requires that a third receiving hole is present and that “a third guide opening is between the second receiving hole and the third receiving hole” in lines 3-5 of the claim. However, as can be see from Figure 2 annotated above, there is no guide opening between the second receiving hole and the third receiving hole.
There is no discussion in the specification of a third guide opening between a second receiving hole and a third receiving hole and there is no figure that illustrates such in an arrangement that also meets the limitations defined by base claim 8. Therefore, claim 9 is indefinite because it’s not apparent what Applicant intends to claim.
The examiner notes that if Applicant intends to claim a new embodiment that is not described in the specification as previously filed or in the parent case, 17/721,363, as originally filed, then the present application should be a continuation-in-part as opposed to a continuation of the parent application because the present application would include new matter not previously disclosed in the parent application. This would require an explanation and illustration of the disclosed embodiment to be added to the disclosure and for the continuity claim to be corrected by Applicant without adding new matter to the present disclosure as filed. The claims defining the embodiment new to the present application would receive the filing date of the present application with respect to prior art application as opposed to the filing date of the parent application for embodiments disclosed in the parent application. Applicant must clarify if this is the intended purpose and make the necessary corrections.
Because there is no explanation or illustration of the claimed embodiment and the examiner is unsure what Applicant is claiming, the claim has not been considered with respect to prior art. This is not an indication of allowable subject matter.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-8 and 11-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-8 and 11-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2 at least disclose or suggest all of the limitations of claims 1-20 of the present application.
Regarding claim 1; see claim 8 (column 7, lines 63, through column 8, line 8) of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 2; see claim 8 (column 8, lines 9-20) of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 3; see claim 8 (column 8, lines 9-20) of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 4; see claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 5; see claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2, wherein it is within the level of ordinary skill in the art to provide the resilient arms along the direction corresponding to an optical axis of the fiber stub, since the optical axis extends along the length direction and the arms extending from the EMI shielding component in the claimed embodiment, through which the fibers pass, would naturally extend along an axis following the extension direction of the fibers, wherein no novel or unexpected advantages would be expected to occur.
Regarding claim 6; see claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 7; see claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 8; see claims 8 and 13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 11; see claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 12; see claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 13; see claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 14; see claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2, wherein it is within the level of ordinary skill in the art to provide the resilient arms along the direction corresponding to an optical axis of the fiber stub, since the optical axis extends along the length direction and the arms extending from the EMI shielding component in the claimed embodiment, through which the fibers pass, would naturally extend along an axis following the extension direction of the fibers, wherein no novel or unexpected advantages would be expected to occur.
Regarding claim 15; see claim 1 or claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 16; see claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 17; see claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 18; see claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 19; see claim 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
Regarding claim 20; see claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,019,290 B2.
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, 6-8, 10, 15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chang (US 2020/0018909 A1).
Regarding claim 1; Chang discloses an electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding component (see Figures 16 and 17), comprising a metallic shielding body (metal shield plate 205) including:
a receiving hole (fiber stub openings 255) that is configured to receive a fiber stub; and
a guide opening (guide opening; see annotated Figure 17 below) disposed at an edge of the metallic shielding body (205) and laterally in communication with the receiving hole (255), wherein:
the guide opening (guide opening) has a width that is less than a diameter of the receiving hole (255), and
the guide opening (guide opening) is penetrable by an optical fiber.
PNG
media_image2.png
391
396
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6; Chang discloses the EMI shielding component of claim 1, wherein:
the receiving hole (255; first receiving hole; see annotated Figure 17 below) is a first receiving hole, the fiber stub is a first fiber stub, the guide opening (first guide opening) is a first guide opening, and the edge is a first edge (first edge); and
the metallic shielding body (205) further includes:
a second receiving hole (second receiving hole 255; see annotated Figure 17 below) that is configured to receive a second fiber stub, and
a second guide opening (second guide opening; see annotated Figure 17 below) disposed at a second edge (second edge) of the metallic shielding body (205) and laterally in communication with the second receiving hole (see Figure 17).
PNG
media_image3.png
480
740
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7; Chang discloses the EMI shielding component of claim 1, wherein:
the receiving hole is a first receiving hole (first receiving hole; see annotated Figure 17 below), the fiber stub is a first fiber stub, the guide opening is a first guide opening (first guide opening; see annotated Figure 17 below); and
the metallic shielding body (205) further includes:
a second receiving hole (second receiving hole; see annotated Figure 17 below) that is configured to receive a second fiber stub, and a second guide opening (second guide opening; see annotated Figure 17 below) disposed at the edge (the edge; see annotated Figure 17 below) of the metallic shielding body (205) and laterally in communication with the second receiving hole (see Figure 17).
PNG
media_image4.png
480
740
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8; Chang discloses an electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding component (205; see Figures 16 and 17) comprising a metallic shielding body (205) including:
a first receiving hole (first receiving hole; see annotated Figure 17 below) configured to receive a first fiber stub;
a first guide opening (first guide opening) disposed at an edge (the edge) of the metallic shielding body (205) and laterally in communication with the first receiving hole;
a second receiving hole (second receiving hole) configured to receive a second fiber stub; and
a second guide opening (second guide opening; see Figure 17 annotated below) between the first receiving hole and the second receiving hole, wherein:
the first receiving hole (first receiving hole) is in communication with the second receiving hole (second receiving hole) through the second guide opening (second guide opening),
the first guide opening (first guide opening) has a width that is less than a diameter of the first receiving hole (first receiving hole),
the first guide (first guide opening) opening is penetrable by a first optical fiber and a second optical fiber, and
the second guide opening (second guide opening) is penetrable by the second optical fiber.
PNG
media_image5.png
348
587
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10; Chang discloses the EMI shielding component of claim 8, wherein the metallic shielding body (205) further includes:
a third receiving hole (third receiving hole; see Figure 17 annotated below) configured to receive a third fiber stub; and
a third guide opening (third guide opening) disposed at the edge (the edge) of the metallic shielding body (205) and laterally in communication with the third receiving hole (third receiving hole);
a fourth receiving hole (fourth receiving hole) configured to receive a fourth fiber stub; and
a fourth guide opening (fourth guide opening) between the third receiving hole (third receiving hole) and the fourth receiving hole (fourth receiving hole), wherein:
the third receiving hole (third receiving hole) is in communication with the fourth receiving hole (fourth receiving hole) through the fourth guide opening (fourth guide opening), the third guide opening (third guide opening) is penetrable by a third optical fiber and a fourth optical fiber, and the fourth guide opening (fourth guide opening) is penetrable by the fourth optical fiber.
PNG
media_image6.png
414
800
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15; Chang discloses an optical fiber adapter module (see Figures 16 and 17), comprising:
a fiber stub (211);
a receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber) disposed at a periphery of the fiber stub; and
an electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding component (205) comprising a metallic shielding body (205) including:
a receiving hole (255) that is configured to receive the fiber stub and the receptacle hind end portion, and
a guide opening (guide opening; see Figure 17 annotated below) disposed at an edge of the metallic shielding body (205) and laterally in communication with the receiving hole (255), wherein the guide opening has a width that is less than a diameter of the receiving hole (see Figure 17).
PNG
media_image2.png
391
396
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 17; Chang discloses the optical fiber adapter module of claim 15, wherein:
the receiving hole is a first receiving hole (first receiving hole; see annotated Figure 17 below), the fiber stub (211) is a first fiber stub (see Figure 16, wherein there is a fiber stub 211 for each corresponding receiving hole 255 in the metallic shielding body 205), the receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber) is a first receptacle hind end portion, and the guide opening is a first guide opening (first guide opening; see annotated Figure 17 below); and
the optical fiber adapter module further comprises:
a second fiber stub (211; fiber stub corresponding to second receiving hole; see Figures 16 and 17); and
a second receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber) disposed at a periphery of the second fiber stub (211); and
the metallic shielding body (205) of the EMI shielding component (205) further includes:
a second receiving hole (second receiving hole; see Figure 17 annotated below) configured to receive the second fiber stub and the second receptacle hind end portion, and
a second guide opening (second guide opening) disposed at the edge (the edge) of the metallic shielding body (205) and laterally in communication with the second receiving hole.
PNG
media_image4.png
480
740
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18; Chang discloses the optical fiber adapter module of claim 15, wherein:
the receiving hole is a first receiving hole (first receiving hole; see Figure 17, annotated below), the fiber stub (211) is a first fiber stub (see Figure 16), the receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber) is a first receptacle hind end portion, the guide opening is a first guide opening (first guide opening), and the edge is a first edge (first edge);
the optical fiber adapter module further comprises:
a second fiber stub (211); and
a second receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber) disposed at a periphery of the second fiber stub; and
the metallic shielding body (205) of the EMI shielding component (205) further includes:
a second receiving hole (second receiving hole; see Figure 17 annotated below) configured to receive the second fiber stub (211) and the second receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber), and
a second guide opening (second guide opening) disposed at a second edge (second edge) of the metallic shielding body (205) and laterally in communication with the second receiving hole (second receiving hole).
PNG
media_image3.png
480
740
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19; Chang discloses the optical fiber adapter module of claim 15, wherein:
the receiving hole is a first receiving hole (first receiving hole; see Figure 17 annotated below), the fiber stub (211) is a first fiber stub, the receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber) is a first receptacle hind end portion, the guide opening (first guide opening) is a first guide opening, and the edge is a first edge (first edge);
the optical fiber adapter module further comprises:
a second fiber stub; and
a second receptacle hind end portion disposed at a periphery of the second fiber stub; and
the metallic shielding body (205) of the EMI shielding component (205) further includes:
a second receiving hole (second receiving hole; see Figure 17 annotated below) configured to receive the second fiber stub (211) and the second receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber), and
a second guide opening (second guide opening) between the first receiving hole and the second receiving hole,
wherein:
the first receiving hole (first receiving hole) is in communication with the second receiving hole (second receiving hole) through the second guide opening (second guide opening),
the first guide opening (first guide opening) is penetrable by a first optical fiber and a second optical fiber, and
the second guide opening (second guide opening) is penetrable by the second optical fiber.
PNG
media_image5.png
348
587
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20; Chang discloses the optical fiber adapter module of claim 15, wherein:
the EMI shielding component (205) is a first EMI shielding component (205; a first section of the EMI shielding component 205 where the first receiving hole is formed is considered to be a first EMI Shielding component), the metallic shielding body (205) is a first metallic shielding body (205), the receiving hole (first receiving hole; see Figure 17 annotated below) is a first receiving hole, the fiber stub (211) is a first fiber stub, the receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber) is a first receptacle hind end portion, the guide opening is a first guide opening (first guide opening), and the edge is a first edge; and
the optical fiber adapter module further comprises:
a second fiber stub (211);
a second receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber) disposed at a periphery of the second fiber stub; and
a second EMI shielding component (a second section of the EMI shielding component 205 where the second receiving hole is formed, as labelled in Figure 17 below, is considered to be a second EMI shielding component integrally formed with first EMI shielding component) comprising a second metaling shielding body (second section of 205) including:
a second receiving hole (second receiving hole; see Figure 17 annotated below) that is configured to receive the second fiber stub (211) and the second receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of fiber stub 211 that receives the fiber), and a second guide opening (second guide opening) disposed at a second edge (second edge) of the second metallic shielding body (205) and laterally in communication with the second receiving hole (second receiving hole).
PNG
media_image3.png
480
740
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 6459615 B2.
Regarding claim 1; JP 6459615 B2 discloses an electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding component, comprising a metallic shielding body (shield plate 11c; see Figures 11-13) including:
a receiving hole (opening 11e; see Figure 12) that is configured to receive a fiber stub (fiber stubs within MT ferrule 11a; see Figure 13); and
a guide opening (slit 11f) disposed at an edge of the metallic shielding body (11c) and laterally in communication with the receiving hole (11e), wherein:
the guide opening (11f) has a width that is less than a width of the receiving hole (11e), and
the guide opening (11f) is penetrable by an optical fiber (fibers within MT ferrule 11a).
Regarding claim 15; JP 6459615 B2 discloses an optical fiber adapter module, comprising:
a fiber stub (fiber stubes within MT ferrule 11a);
a receptacle hind end portion (hind end portion of ferrule 11a) disposed at a periphery of the fiber stub; and
an electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding component (11c) comprising a metallic shielding body (11c) including:
a receiving hole (11e) that is configured to receive the fiber stub and the receptacle hind end portion (see Figure 13), and
a guide opening (11f) disposed at an edge of the metallic shielding body (11c) and laterally in communication with the receiving hole (11e),
wherein the guide opening (11c) has a width that is less than a width of the receiving hole (11e).
JP 6459615 B2 discloses a ferrule (11a) and hole (11e) that have a non-circular cross section. Before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to from the hole and the ferrule to have circular cross sections for the purpose of accommodating a ferrule of another standard type (ST or FC type ferrules for example) which has a circular cross section in alternative to the MT ferrule, since no novel or unexpected results would appear to occur.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, 11-14 and 16 would be allowable if the double patenting rejection set forth above were overcome and if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claims 2-5; the prior art of record, which is the most relevant prior art known, does not disclose or reasonably suggest the EMI shielding component defined by claim 2, wherein the edge is a first edge, and wherein the EMI shielding component further comprises an engaging element at a second edge of the metallic shielding body, the engaging element including: a resilient arm extending in a first direction along an axis from the second edge of the metallic shielding body; and an engaging portion extending in a second direction along the axis from a terminal end of the resilient arm, wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction in combination with all of the limitations of base claim 1. Claims 3-5 depend from claim 2.
Regarding claims 11-14; the prior art of record, which is the most relevant prior art known, does not disclose or reasonably suggest the EMI shielding defined by claim 11, wherein the edge is a first edge, and wherein the EMI shielding component further comprises an engaging element at a second edge of the metallic shielding body, the engaging element including: a resilient arm extending in a first direction along an axis from the second edge of the metallic shielding body; and an engaging portion extending in a second direction along the axis from a terminal end of the resilient arm, wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction in combination with all of the limitations of base claim 8. Claims 12-14 depend from claim 11.
Regarding claim 16; the prior art of record, which is the most relevant prior art known, does not disclose or reasonably suggest the optical fiber adapter module defined by claim 16, wherein the edge of the metallic shielding body is a first edge, and wherein the EMI shielding component further comprises: an engaging element at a second edge of the metallic shielding body, the engaging element including: a resilient arm extending in a first direction along an axis from the second edge of the metallic shielding body, and an engaging portion extending in a second direction along the axis from a terminal end of the resilient arm, wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction in combination with all of the limitations of base claim 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE R CONNELLY whose telephone number is (571)272-2345. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 AM to 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.
/MICHELLE R CONNELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights