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 8/8/24 and 7/28/25 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) 1-10 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanno et al. (US 2022/0229245 A1), cited in the IDS filed 8/8/24.
Re. Claim 1, Kanno et al. discloses an optical connector ferrule 1configured to be attached to end portions of a plurality of optical fibers 2 each including a bare portion 2b and a coating (e.g., at coating portion 2a) covering the bare portion, the coatings being partially removed at the end portions (Fig. 2; [0038]),
wherein the optical connector ferrule 1 has
a front-end surface 10a at which a plurality of opening ends configured to allow end surfaces of the plurality of optical fibers to be exposed therethrough are located (Fig. 2; [0039]),
a rear opening 14 configured to allow the plurality of optical fibers to be introduced into an internal space “S” of the optical connector ferrule (Figs. 2-3; [0041], [0044]), and
a plurality of through holes 11 into each of which a corresponding one of the plurality of optical fibers is to be inserted, the plurality of through holes each extending between a corresponding one of the plurality of opening ends and the internal space along a first direction from the front-end surface toward the rear opening (Figs. 2-3; [0039]),
wherein the plurality of opening ends is arranged such that centers of the plurality of opening ends form one or a plurality of rows along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (Fig. 2),
wherein each of the plurality of through holes includes a fiber hole with one of the opening ends (e.g., end of hole 11 closest to front end surface 10a) and a fiber introduction hole 11a allowing communication between the fiber hole and the internal space (Fig 3; [0044]),
wherein each of the fiber holes has a diameter larger than an outer diameter of each of the glass portions and smaller than an outer diameter of each of the coatings (Fig. 3; [0039]),
wherein each of the fiber introduction holes includes an introduction portion having a diameter larger than the outer diameter of each of the coatings and a taper portion allowing communication between the introduction portion and a corresponding one of the fiber holes (Fig. 3; [0044]),
wherein the internal space “S” is defined by a plurality of surfaces (Fig. 3), and
wherein at least one flat surface 15 among the plurality of surfaces is configured to support the plurality of optical fibers such that a central axis of each of the plurality of optical fibers coincides with a central axis of a corresponding one of the fiber holes extending in the first direction (Figs. 2-3; [0044] and [0053]).
However, unlike the claimed invention, Kanno et al. fails to disclose the bare portion 2a of the optical fiber 2 is formed of glass.
Glass is a common optical fiber core material due to its refractive properties, and a “glass portion” as required by the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since 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 2, Kanno et al. renders obvious the optical connector ferrule as discussed above. Kanno et al. also discloses a length “a” of each of the fiber holes defined along the first direction, a length “b” of each of the fiber introduction holes defined along the first direction, and a length “c” of the flat surface defined along the first direction satisfy a relationship a<b+c (Fig. 3). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 3, Kanno et al. renders obvious the optical connector ferrule as discussed above. Kanno et al. also discloses a length “a” of each of the fiber holes defined along the first direction and a length “c” of the flat surface defined along the first direction satisfy a relationship a<c (Fig. 3). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 4, Kanno et al. renders obvious the optical connector ferrule as discussed above.
However, Kanno et al. does not explicitly disclose an arrangement wherein a length b of each of the fiber introduction holes defined along the first direction and a length c of the flat surface defined along the first direction satisfy a relationship b≤c
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing greater protection to the glass portion of the optical fiber by providing a greater length within an enclosed structure. “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 5, Kanno et al. renders obvious the optical connector ferrule as discussed above. Kanno et al. also discloses the flat surface 15 includes a plurality of flat regions formed by dividing the flat surface along at least one of the first and second directions (Figs. 2-3). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claims 6-7, Kanno et al. renders obvious the optical connector ferrule as discussed above. Kanno et al. also discloses a fiber holding member configured to hold the plurality of optical fibers in a state where the plurality of optical fibers are arranged in one or more rows along the second direction, wherein the fiber holding member is placed on the flat surface while holding the plurality of optical fibers, and wherein the fiber holding member is an adhesive layer configured to integrally hold the coatings of the plurality of optical fibers and configured to suppress positional deviations between the plurality of optical fibers ([0045]).
However, unlike the claimed invention, Kanno et al. does not disclose the adhesive is formed of a resin.
Resin is a common adhesive material due to its thermosetting and moldable properties, and a “resin layer” as required by the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since 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 8, Kanno et al. renders obvious the optical connector ferrule as discussed above. Kanno et al. also discloses the fiber holding member has V grooves 26 configured to hold the plurality of optical fibers in a state where the glass portions or the coatings of the plurality of optical fibers are in contact with the V grooves (Figs. 10 and 12; [0064]). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 9, Kanno et al. renders obvious the optical connector ferrule as discussed above. Kanno et al. also discloses the fiber holding member includes a hole array 21 configured to hold the plurality of optical fibers in a state where the hole array is in contact with the glass portions or the coatings of the plurality of optical fibers (figs. 4-6l [0048]-[0049]). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 10, Kanno et al. renders obvious the optical connector ferrule as discussed above.
However, Kanno et al. does not explicitly disclose arrangements wherein each of the plurality of optical fibers is any one of a multi-core optical fiber, a polarization maintaining fiber, and a bundle fiber.
Each of the claimed optical fiber types are well known in the art and one of ordinary skill would have found their use obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing an optical ferrule for commonly used optical fiber types. “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).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the attached PTO-892.
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 9/10/26
Prosecution Insights