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
Information disclosure statements filed 7/16/2026, 5/13/2026, 11/03/2025, 10/17/2024 have been considered.
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 1-29 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 11-41 of U.S. Patent No. 12,085,765 B2 (hereinafter “the ‘765 patent”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they recite claim limitations that are obvious variations of the ‘765 patent.
Specifically, regarding claim 1, the ‘765 patent claims a fiber optic connector comprising: a ferrule portion configured to terminate a plurality of fibers of a fiber optic cable (col. 11, ll. 5-7); an adapter portion structurally configured to receive the ferrule portion (col. 11, ll. 8-9); a body portion structurally configured to be coupled with a multi-fiber cable (col. 11, ll. 10-11); a biasing portion configured to urge the adapter portion toward a rearward facing surface of the ferrule portion (col. 11, ll. 12-13); a housing portion structurally configured to be coupled with the body portion (col. 11, ll. 14-15); wherein the adapter portion is configured to be inserted into a rearward end of the housing portion between the ferrule portion and the biasing portion (col. 11, ll. 16-18); wherein the adapter portion and the ferrule portion are configured to move axially relative to the housing portion and the body portion against an urging force of the biasing portion (col. 11, ll. 19-22); wherein the ferrule portion is configured with a cross-sectional profile that is smaller than a ferrule of an MPO connector such that the ferrule portion is configured to be pushed through a duct having an inside diameter smaller than a cross-sectional profile of a ferrule of an MPO connector (col. 11, ll. 36-41); wherein the adapter portion is configured with a cross-sectional profile that is larger than a cross-sectional profile of the ferrule such that the adapter portion is prevented from being pushed through the duct coupled with the ferrule portion (col. 6, ll. 42-46); and wherein the adapter portion is configured to be coupled with the ferrule portion after the ferrule portion and the terminated plurality of fibers are pushed through the duct so as to provide a field-assembled MPO connector (col. 6, ll. 47-50).
Regarding claim 2, the ‘765 patent claims a retaining portion disposed between the biasing portion and the adapter portion (col. 11, ll. 51-54).
Regarding claim 3, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the biasing portion is configured to urge the retaining portion toward the adapter portion (col. 11, ll. 55-57).
Regarding claim 4, the ‘765 patent claims a shell portion structurally configured to be coupled with the housing portion (col. 11, ll. 58-60).
Regarding claim 5, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the shell portion is configured to house a pair of biasing members bearing against a forward facing surface of the housing portion and a rearward facing surface of the shell portion to urge the shell portion in the forward direction (col. 11, ll. 61-65).
Regarding claim 6, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the connector is configured to be disconnected from a mating adapter by urging the shell portion in a rearward direction against a biasing force of the pair of biasing members, thereby transferring such urging force to the housing portion rather than the cable (col. 11, ll. 66- col. 12, ll. 4).
Regarding claim 7, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the body portion includes two retention body halves configured to be coupled with one another (col. 12, ll. 5-7).
Regarding claim 8, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the two retention body halves are configured to be coupled with the terminated plurality of fibers after the ferrule portion and the terminated plurality of fibers are pushed through the duct (col. 12, ll. 8-11).
Regarding claim 9, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the adapter portion and the housing portion are configured to limit a range of axial movement of the ferrule portion relative to the body portion (col. 12, ll. 12-15).
Regarding claim 10, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the biasing portion comprises a coil spring configured to extend about the fibers of the multi fiber cable (col. 12, ll. 16-18).
Regarding claim 11, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the biasing portion is configured to be compressed between a forward facing surface of the body portion and a rearward facing surface of the adapter portion (col. 12, ll. 19-22).
Regarding claim 12, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the body portion is configured to be coupled with the multi-fiber cable via a crimp portion configured to be crimped onto the multi-fiber cable (col. 12, ll. 23-26).
Regarding claim 13, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the biasing portion is configured to engage a rearward facing surface of the adapter portion (col. 12, ll. 30-32).
Regarding claim 14, the ‘765 patent claims a fiber optic connector comprising: a ferrule portion configured to terminate a plurality of fibers of a fiber optic cable (col. 12, ll. 33-35); an adapter portion structurally configured to receive the ferrule portion (col. 12, ll. 36-37); a body portion structurally configured to be coupled with a multi-fiber cable (col. 12, ll. 38-39); a biasing portion configured to urge the adapter portion toward a rearward facing surface of the ferrule portion (col. 12, ll. 40-41); wherein the adapter portion and the ferrule portion are configured to move axially relative to the body portion against an urging force of the biasing portion (col. 12, ll. 44-46); wherein the ferrule portion is configured with a cross-sectional profile that is smaller than a ferrule of a multi-fiber push on (MPO) connector such that the ferrule portion is configured to be pushed through a duct having an inside diameter smaller than a cross-sectional profile of a ferrule of an MPO connector (col. 12, ll. 60-65); wherein the adapter portion is configured with a cross-sectional profile that is larger than a cross-sectional profile of the ferrule such that the adapter portion is prevented from being pushed through the duct coupled with the ferrule portion (col. 12, ll. 66- col. 13, ll. 3); and wherein the adapter portion is configured to be coupled with the ferrule portion after the ferrule portion and the terminated plurality of fibers are pushed through the duct so as to provide a field-assembled MPO connector (col. 13, ll. 4-7).
Regarding claim 15, the ‘765 patent claims a retaining portion disposed between the biasing portion and the adapter portion (col. 13, ll. 8-11).
Regarding claim 16, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the biasing portion is configured to urge the retaining portion toward the adapter portion (col. 13, ll., 12-14).
Regarding claim 17, the ‘765 patent claims wherein a housing portion structurally configured to be coupled with the body portion (col. 13, ll. 15-17).
Regarding claim 18, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the adapter portion is configured to be inserted into a rearward end of the housing portion between the ferrule portion and the biasing portion (col. 13, ll. 18-21).
Regarding claim 19, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the adapter portion and the ferrule portion are configured to move axially relative to the housing portion and the body portion against an urging force of the biasing portion (col. 13, ll. 22-25).
Regarding claim 20, the ‘765 patent claims a shell portion structurally configured to be coupled with the housing portion (col. 13, ll. 26-28).
Regarding claim 21, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the shell portion is configured to house a pair of biasing members bearing against a forward facing surface of the housing portion and a rearward facing surface of the shell portion to urge the shell portion in the forward direction (col. 13, ll. 29-33).
Regarding claim 22, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the connector is configured to be disconnected from a mating adapter by urging the shell portion in a rearward direction against a biasing force of the pair of biasing members, thereby transferring such urging force to the housing portion rather than the cable (col. 13, ll. 34- col. 14, ll. 4).
Regarding claim 23, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the body portion includes two retention body halves configured to be coupled with one another (col. 14, ll. 5-7).
Regarding claim 24, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the two retention body halves are configured to be coupled with the terminated plurality of fibers after the ferrule portion and the terminated plurality of fibers are pushed through the duct (col. 14, ll. 8-11).
Regarding claim 25, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the adapter portion and the housing portion are configured to limit a range of axial movement of the ferrule portion relative to the body portion (col. 14, ll. 12-16).
Regarding claim 26, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the biasing portion comprises a coil spring configured to extend about the fibers of the multi-fiber cable (col. 14, ll. 17-19).
Regarding claim 27, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the biasing portion is configured to be compressed between a forward facing surface of the body portion and a rearward facing surface of the adapter portion (col. 14, ll. 20-23).
Regarding claim 28, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the body portion is configured to be coupled with the multi fiber cable via a crimp portion configured to be crimped onto the multi fiber cable (col. 14, ll. 24-27).
Regarding claim 29, the ‘765 patent claims wherein the biasing portion is configured to engage a rearward facing surface of the adapter portion (col. 14, ll. 32-34).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNG H PAK whose telephone number is (571)272-2353. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7AM- 5PM.
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.
/SUNG H PAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights