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 .
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 describes a part of the fixing unit as “a ratchet part”. While Applicant’s may be their own lexicographer, the element name implies that the ratchet part has a ratcheting function. Because there is no ratcheting function described related to the ratcheting part, this claim term is objected to.
Claim 1 describes a space within ratchet part as “a travel gear space”. This space is simply describes as space through which an optical fiber passes. This claim term is objected to because the words “travel gear” imply both something is traveling and a gear mechanism is involved. However it appears that this element is simply a space within another component. Because the words travel and gear are not related to the space inside the ratchet part, this claim term is objected to.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-12 are 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.
In claims 1 and 12, “the second member” lacks antecedent basis.
Claims 1-12 begin with the preamble “waterproof optic connector”. The claimed connector has various parts including a fixing unit, a movable unit, an elastic part (claim 1) and a back-end structure including a camping tube, a sealing tube and a boot (claim 8). The claims explain that the connector is intended to be connected with a socket having a first member and the pressure which moves the movable unit toward the first member is provided by the second member (claim 1). Confusion arises from the preamble, when reading the claims as a whole, because there is no structure or combination of structures in the claims which impart the “waterproof” properties on the connector or connection system. There are no seals described, or waterproof chambers or connections. The skilled artisan, reading the body of each of the claims would not understand why any of the various components of the claimed optic connector would be any more waterproof than a common optic connector. For this reason, the claims, read as a whole, are unclear because they describe an optic connector having an attribute (waterproofness) without any clear structure or means for achieving that attribute.
Claim 7 claims “a sheath that protects the moveable unit”. It is unclear how a sheath can protect a movable unit (which comprises a top junction and an inner junction from claim 4). The examiner looked to the specification for clarity, but the specification showed sheath 11 of the fiber optic cable, and did not show the sheath protecting any part of the moveable unit 30.
Claim 7 recites “a sheath… connected to the connection part, and a connection part that is combined with the top junction”. Claim 1 introduces “a connection part” as part of the fixing unit connected to a first member of a socket. It is unclear how “the connection part” or “a connection part” of claim 7 relates to the previously recited connection part of claim 1. The examiner looked to the specification for clarity and noted that the fixing unit 20 has a connection part 121 which comprises fiber optic connectors. The specification also recites a connection part 33 which is part of the movable unit. The examiner believes that the connection part of claim 1 is likely related to connection part 121 of the fixing unit and the connection part of claim 7 is likely related to the connection part 33 of the movable unit. It is recommended that in both the specification and the claims that element 121 is given a different name from element 33 to avoid confusion.
Claim 11 recites “the movable unit further comprises: a first protection tube that protrudes from the guide body”. It is unclear how the movable unit comprises a first protection tube that protrudes from the guide body because the guide body is not part of the moveable unit. It is part of the guide part (claim 3) and the guide part is part of the Fixing unit (claim 1).
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 –
(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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsumoto et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0215322 A1.
With regard to claim 12, Matsumoto, in figs. 1-4, discloses a waterproof optic connector comprising: a fixing unit (62) in which a connection part (12) connected to a first member (80) of a socket is disposed; a movable unit (14) that is combined with a part of the fixing unit (62) and that is movable; and an elastic part (24) that applies an elastic force to the movable unit (14) so that the movable unit becomes distant from the first member (80), wherein the movable unit (14) comprises: a top junction (52) that is combined and trapped at the fixing unit (62) so that the top junction is movable in a straight line, and an inner junction (51) that is combined with the top junction (52) and an inside of which is penetrated, and wherein the movable unit is movable in a straight line in a guide body (portion 75) of the fixing unit, the elastic part (24) applies the elastic force to the top junction (52) so that the top junction is trapped at the fixing unit (62), and the movable unit (14) has a location set by moving in a straight line toward the first member (80) by a pressurization of the second member (18) that is combined with the first member (80).
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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto in view of Kanno, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0085036 A1.
With regard to claim 1, Matsumoto, in figs. 1-4, discloses a waterproof optic connector comprising: a fixing unit (62) in which a connection part (12) connected to a first member (80) of a socket is disposed; a movable unit (14) that is combined with a part of the fixing unit (62) and that is movable; and an elastic part (24) that applies an elastic force to the movable unit so that the movable unit (14) becomes distant from the first member, wherein the fixing unit comprises: a ratchet part (front portion of 62 into which connectors 12 are inserted, including wall 72) in which a connection part (12) is disposed, and a guide part (rear portion of 62 including tubular portion 75) that protrudes in a direction opposite to a direction of the connection part (12) from the ratchet part and with which the movable unit (14) is movably combined, and wherein the movable unit (14) has a location set by moving in a straight line toward the first member (80) by a pressurization of the second member (18) combined with the first member (80), a travel gear space (inside 62) through which an optical fiber (22) passes is formed in the ratchet part between the guide part and the connection part, and an optical fiber passage (through 75) connected to the travel gear space is formed within the guide part [0049-0063].
Matsumoto discloses that the fixing unit including the ratchet part and the guide part are one unitary unit, not two separate units. Kanno, in fig. 4, teaches a similar optic connector having a elastic part (52) and a two part fixing unit (40/54) where the forward ratchet part (40) holds a connector part (30) and a rear guide part (54) is engaged with the elastic part (52) which urges the fixing unit (40/54) forward [0047].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the Matsumoto fixing unit as a two part unit, as taught by Kanno, as an alternative design which may provide for an easier assembly/disassembly.
With regard to claim 2, the Matsumoto/Kanno waterproof optic connector described in the rejection of claim 1 above teaches a seated groove (shown in Kanno fig. 6B, interior of 40 configured to accommodate ferrule 30 and 54) in which the guide part (54) is separably disposed is formed in the ratchet part (40), and the fixing unit (40/54) further comprises a binding part (engagement between 40 and 54) that prevents a movement of the guide part by binding the guide part (54) with the ratchet part (40).
With regard to claim 3, the Matsumoto/Kanno waterproof optic connector described in the rejection of claim 1 above teaches the guide part (54) comprises: a guide body that protrudes from the ratchet part (40), and a flange (Matsumoto flange 65 or Kanno flange rear surface of 54) formed in an outer circumference of the guide body and separated from the ratchet part, wherein a cross section of the optical fiber passage is increased toward the ratchet part on the basis of the flange (as shown in Kanno 54).
With regard to claim 4, the Matsumoto/Kanno waterproof optic connector described in the rejection of claim 3 above teaches that the movable unit (14) comprises: a top junction (52) that is combined with the guide body so that the top junction (52) moves in a straight line and that is trapped at the flange (65), and an inner junction (51) that is combined with the top junction (52) and faces the flange and an inside of which is penetrated, wherein the movable unit (14) is movable in a straight line between the flange (65) and the ratchet part, and the elastic part (24) is disposed between the flange (65) and the inner junction (51) and applies the elastic force so that the top junction is trapped at the flange (65).
With regard to claim 5, the Matsumoto/Kanno waterproof optic connector described in the rejection of claim 4 above teaches that a guide groove through which the guide body penetrates is formed in the top junction in a polygon shape (see Kanno fig. 6B), and a rail and a rail groove that provide guidance to a movement of the top junction in a straight line are formed in the guide body and a circumference of the guide groove.
With regard to claim 6, the Matsumoto/Kanno waterproof optic connector described in the rejection of claim 5 above teaches that an outer circumference of the flange (65) comes into contact with an inner circumference of the top junction (52), a part of each of the outer circumference of the flange (65) and the inner circumference of the top junction (51) comprises a plane, and the plane provides guidance to the movement of the top junction in the straight line.
With regard to claim 7, the Matsumoto/Kanno waterproof optic connector described in the rejection of claim 6 above teaches a sheath (29) that protects the movable unit and the optical fiber (22) connected to the connection part (12), and a connection part (15/16/17) that is combined with the top junction.
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto and Kanno, as applied to claims 1-7 and further in view of Margolin et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,687,288.
With regard to claim 8, the Matsumoto/Kanno waterproof optic connector described in the rejection of claim 7 above teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim, including a clamping tube 16 that surrounds the sheath 29 and a sealing tube 17 that is connected to the top junction.
Matsumoto/Kanno does not expressly disclose a rivet, that is inserted into the sheath or a boot.
Margolin, in figs. 1A-3 teach an optic connector where in the connection portion where the connector attaches to the cable (21), there is a rivet (21) that is inserted into the sheath (29) to strengthen the cable and a boot (23) that is combined with the sealing tube (3) and that surrounds the sheath.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the rivet and boot of Margolin with the Matsumoto/Kanno optic connector to further improve the connection between the optic connector and the cable.
With regard to claim 9, the Matsumoto/Kanno/Margolin waterproof optic connector described in the rejection of claim 8 above teaches a bottom tube (rear portion 50 of 14) that is closely attached to the inner junction and the clamping tube by a pressurization of the sealing tube (17) within the sealing tube (17), and a junction sealing member (15) that is disposed between an inner circumference of the sealing tube (17) and an outer circumference of the sheath (29).
With regard to claim 10, the Matsumoto/Kanno/Margolin waterproof optic connector described in the rejection of claim 9 above teaches a bottom combination part (connection between 50 and 17) that combines the bottom tube and the inner junction with a gap, and the gap enables the sealing tube to be offset by the combination of the top junction, so that the bottom combination part is closely attached to the clamping tube (16).
With regard to claim 11, the Matsumoto/Kanno/Margolin waterproof optic connector described in the rejection of claim 8 above teaches that the movable unit (14) further comprises: a first protection tube (38 of 62) that protrudes from the guide body (62) toward the inner junction (14/52), and a second protection tube (51/52) that protrudes from the inner junction toward the first protection tube (38) and that is connected to the first protection tube, wherein the optical fiber (22) of the sheath (29) passes through an inside of the guide body, through the second protection tube and an inside of the first protection tube.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thomas A Hollweg whose telephone number is (571)270-1739. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4.
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, Matthew W Such can be reached at (571)272-1570. 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.
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights