DETAILED ACTION
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 –
Claim(s) 1, 6, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. PGPub 2008/0050083 A1 by Frazier et al.
Regarding claim 1, Frazier teaches an optical fiber distribution element comprising: a chassis defining an interior (interior defined by an exterior portion 32); a movable tray (shelf portion 34) slidably movable (via a rail device) from within the chassis to a position at least partially outside the chassis, the tray defining a front end and a rear end; a slide mechanism (the rail device 44) which connects the movable tray to the chassis; at least one hingedly mounted frame member (pivotable portion 38) within the tray which hinges about an axis perpendicular to the direction of movement of the movable tray (as shown in Fig. 7, the tray (34) slides in a depth direction of the exterior portion (32) and the pivotable portion 38 rotates about a axis parallel to a width direction of the tray (34, ¶[0030]); and a cover (top portion 68) mounted to the tray and movable between an access position and an operational position when the tray is in an open position, only the operational position of the cover allowing the tray to move from the open position to a closed position, the access position allowing access to the at least one hingedly mounted frame member, and the cover in the access position preventing the tray from moving from the open to the closed position (i.e., the tray 38 cannot slide into the exterior portion while the top 68 is in its fixed, open position as illustrated in Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 6, Frazier further teaches the at least one hingedly mounted frame member is configured to support a fiber optic splice (72).
Regarding claim 8, Frazier further teaches the cover includes a hinge that is received by a hinge receiver defined on the movable tray, the hinge of the cover and the hinge receiver of the tray cooperatively configured to automatically keep the cover in the access position when the cover has been brought to the access position (pivot is described as pins and devices that receive/engage the pins, ¶[0029], [0031]).
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.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frazier et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO 2020/148296 A1 patent publication.
Regarding claims 2, 3, 9, 11, Frazier teaches using a sliding portion (34) for storing, among other, fiber optic splices (72) therein but does not specify using a plurality of hingedly mounted frame members. The ‘296 publication discloses, with reference to Figs. 20-22, a telecommunications drawer (410) as a part of a sliding chassis distribution element, disposed therein a splice arrangement (430) in the form of a plurality of pivotable splice trays (432) mounted in a stacked arrangement toward a rear (402) of the drawer (410), staggered in a depth direction of the drawer, i.e., generally parallel to the direction of travel of the drawer (410), each of the trays includes a cable management structure (illustrated as a central radius limiter and cable holding tabs or fingers around the periphery in Fig. 21) for managing cables extending between the slide mechanism and the at least one hingedly mounted frame member within the tray; wherein the cable management structure defining a two-layered structure (multiple layers of trays 432) defining a lower channel separated from an upper channel by cable management fingers; wherein the tray includes two of the cable management structures (tab/fingers facing each other in the width direction of the trays 432), each located at an opposite side of the at least one hingedly mounted frame member. Using a stack of pivotable (or hingedly mounted) frame members for storing splice portions can increase the capacity of the splice portions while maintaining ease of access to lower frame members, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Frazier’s invention, by doing the same as suggested in the ‘296 publication.
Regarding claim 12 and with respect the limitations of what the cable management structures are employed to do, a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)
Regarding claim 10, 13, the ‘296 publication further discloses using includes snap-fit features (1968) at a bottom of a support member (1923) for slidable and removable mounting to the drawer (Figs. 73-75), which allows the support member to be easily removed, replaced and/or repaired.
Claim(s) 4, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frazier et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO 2019/201878 A1 patent publication.
Regarding claims 4, 5, Frazier teaches the slidably movable tray (34) but does not specify a radius limiter on a sliding mechanism as claimed. The ‘878 publication also discloses, with reference to Figs. 30-41, a movable tray (224) mounted with a slide mechanism (230), which further includes a radius limiter (284) held by a dovetail (288) of the slide mechanism, a general S-shaped pathway (276) extending from either side from the tray (224) to supply cables (e.g., feeder cables from exterior) to each of trays. Similarly in Figs. 42-45, an alternative slide mechanism 330 including two wheels (332) and two wires (334, 336) allows for movement of the trays and related radius limiters and synchronized movement similar to slide mechanism (230). Positioning the S-shaped pathway adjacent to a hinge avoids potentially damaging cable pull during pivoting movement of a frame member (256) and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Frazier’s invention, by using the cable radius limiter on the slide mechanism suggested in the ‘878 publication for the same advantage.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frazier et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of CN 105259627 B patent publication. Frazier teaches the movable tray (34) having the cover(68) but does not further specify using a removable card for receiving indicia relating to fiber optic connectivity information within the movable tray. The ‘627 publication also discloses an optical fiber tray comprising a cover (1) with a label (17) that provides identification information. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Frazier’s invention by adding a removable label or card to the cover of the movable tray, so that a user may easily identify or gain information regarding components and/or their respective functions within the tray without opening the cover to inspect the tray.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14, 15 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. Claims 16-22 are allowed. While prior art suggest using snap-fit features to removably lock the frame member, it fails to further teach or suggest features of the locking structure including a hinge pin and a spaced apart retention tab on the frame member and a hinge opening and a flexible tab defined on the tray, the hinge opening configured to receive the hinge pin and the flexible tab configured to elastically flex to receive the retention tab and to provide a stop surface to prevent slideable movement of the retention tab, when considered in view of the rest of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20030007767 discloses a cable management panel with a sliding drawer and cable radius management structures.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLIE PENG whose telephone number is (571)272-2177. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 6PM.
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, Thomas 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.
/CHARLIE Y PENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights