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 statement (IDS) submitted on 9/16/24 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-6, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DiFonzo et al. (US 7,841,776 B2).
Re. Claim 1, DiFonzo et al. discloses an opto-electrical connection system, comprising:
a first connector 510/710 including a plurality of first conductors 520/720, a plurality of first optical fibers 530/730, and a first housing 540 placing each leading end portion of the plurality of first conductors and each leading end portion of the plurality of first optical fibers therein (Figs. 5C-5D and 7; col. 6 lines 31-51; col. 7 lines 60-64; col. 8 lines 6-9; col. 8 lines 40-56); and
a second connector 560/760 including a plurality of second conductors 570/770, a plurality of second optical fibers 580/780, and a second housing 585 placing each leading end portion of the plurality of second conductors and each leading end portion of the plurality of second optical fibers therein (Figs. 5C-5D and 7; col. 6 lines 31-33 and 52-59; col. 7 lines 60-64; col. 8 lines 6-9; col. 8 lines 40-56),
wherein the first housing 540 includes a first end face 550/750 configured to face the second housing, and the second housing 585 includes a second end face 590/790 configured to face the first housing (Figs. 5C-5D and 7; col. 6 lines 60-67; col. 8 lines 40-56),
wherein each leading end portion of the plurality of first conductors 520/720 is exposed at the first end face, and each leading end portion of the plurality of second conductors 570/770 is exposed at the second end face (Fig. 7; col. 8 lines 40-46), and,
wherein each of the plurality of first conductors 520/720 and each of the plurality of second conductors 570/770 are configured to be brought into contact with each other to achieve conduction, and each of the plurality of first optical fibers 530/730 and each of the plurality of second optical fibers 580/780 are configured to be optically coupled to each other in a non-contact state, when the first connector 510/710 is connected to the second connector 560/760 (Fig. 7; col. 8 lines 40-46).
Re. Claim 2, DiFonzo et al. discloses at least one optical element 732 and 782 configured to optically couple corresponding optical fibers to each other is provided between each of the plurality of first optical fibers and each of the plurality of second optical fibers (Fig. 7; col. 8 lines 52-56).
Re. Claim 5, DiFonzo et al. discloses each leading end of at least one of the plurality of first optical fibers 730 or the plurality of second optical fibers 780 is located at an inner side than an end face of the first housing or the second housing placing each leading end therein (e.g. each of the first optical fibers 730 and second optical fibers 780 are recessed within a fixed cable housing) (Fig. 7; col. 8 lines 52-56).
Re. Claim 6, DiFonzo et al. discloses a spacer (e.g. forward portion of fixed cable housing) located between the first end face of the first housing and the second end face of the second housing (Fig. 7; col. 8 lines 52-56).
Re. Claim 13, DiFonzo et al. discloses an opto-electrical connector comprising:
a plurality of conductors 510/710 (Figs. 5C-5D and 7; col. 6 lines 31-51; col. 7 lines 60-64; col. 8 lines 6-9; col. 8 lines 40-56);
a plurality of optical fibers 530/730 (Figs. 5C-5D and 7; col. 6 lines 31-51; col. 7 lines 60-64; col. 8 lines 6-9; col. 8 lines 40-56); and
a housing 540 placing each leading end portion of the plurality of conductors and each leading end portion of the plurality of optical fibers therein (Figs. 5C-5D and 7; col. 6 lines 31-51; col. 7 lines 60-64; col. 8 lines 6-9; col. 8 lines 40-56);
wherein the plurality of conductors 510/710 are exposed at an end face 550/750 of the housing, and wherein each leading end of the plurality of optical fibers is located at an inner side than the end face of the housing (e.g., inside recess formed by end face 550/750) such that the plurality of optical fibers are optically coupled to corresponding optical fibers in a non-contact state (Fig. 7; col. 8 lines 40-46).
Re. Claim 14, DiFonzo et al. discloses an optical element 732 configured to optically couple each of the plurality of optical fibers to each of the corresponding optical fibers (Fig. 7; col. 8 lines 52-56).
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DiFonzo et al. (US 7,841,776 B2).
Re. Claim 3, DiFonzo et al. discloses the opto-electrical connection system as discussed above, wherein an air gap is provided between a leading end of each of the plurality of first optical fibers and a leading end of each of the plurality of second optical fibers such that the leading edges are in close proximity with one another (Fig. 7; col. 8 lines 52-56).
However, DiFonzo et al. fails to disclose the size of the air gap, and accordingly fails to disclose an arrangement the air gap has a width of 50 μm or less.
An air gap of 50 microns or less 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 that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DiFonzo et al. (US 7,841,776 B2) and Stevens (US 2005/0220419 A1).
Re. Claim 4, DiFonzo et al. discloses the opto-electrical connection system as discussed above. As seen in Fig. 7, each leading end of the plurality of first optical fibers 530/730 includes a first leading end face orthogonal with respect to a longitudinal direction in which each first optical fiber extends, and each leading end of the second plurality of optical fibers 580/780 includes a second leading end face orthogonal with respect to a longitudinal direction in which each second optical fiber extends, wherein the first leading end face faces the second leading end face when the first connector is connected to the second connector.
DiFonzo et al. fails to disclose shaping the end face of either of the pluralities of optical fibers. That is, DiFonzo fails to disclose an arrangement wherein the first leading end faces are inclined with respect to a plane orthogonal to a longitudinal direction in which each first optical fiber extends, and the second leading end faces are inclined with respect to a plane orthogonal to a longitudinal direction in which each second optical fiber extends.
Stevens discloses an optical coupling between a first connector 10 and a second connector 30, wherein a first optical fiber 17 of the first connector comprises a first leading end face 17a inclined with respect to a plane orthogonal to a longitudinal direction in which each first optical fiber extends, and the second optical fiber 32 of the second connector comprises a second leading end face 32a inclined with respect to a plane orthogonal to a longitudinal direction in which each second optical fiber extends, wherein the first leading end face faces the second leading end face when the first connector is connected to the second connector (Fig. 4; [0026]).
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as Stevens discloses the beveled end faces reduce interference between the first and second connectors (Stevens: [0026]).
Claim(s) 7-9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DiFonzo et al. (US 7,841,776 B2) and Wang et al. (US 2024/0219658 A1).
Re. Claims 7-9, DiFonzo et al. discloses the opto-electrical connection system as discussed above.
However, DiFonzo et al. does not disclose an arrangement wherein the first connector includes a first electrical sub-connector placing each leading end portion of the plurality of first conductors therein and a first optical sub-connector placing the plurality of first optical fibers therein, wherein the second connector includes a second electrical sub-connector placing each leading end portion of the plurality of second conductors therein and a second optical sub-connector placing the plurality of second optical fibers therein, wherein the first electrical sub-connector is configured to be connected to the second electrical sub-connector, and the first optical sub-connector is configured to be connected to the second optical sub-connector. DiFonzo et al. also does not disclose the first electrical sub-connector includes a first guide pin, and the second electrical sub-connector includes a first guide hole corresponding to the first guide pin, wherein the first optical sub-connector includes a second guide pin, and the second optical sub-connector includes a second guide hole corresponding to the second guide pin, wherein the first electrical sub-connector is positioned with respect to the second electrical sub-connector by inserting the first guide pin into the first guide hole, and wherein the first optical sub-connector is positioned with respect to the second optical sub-connector by inserting the second guide pin into the second guide hole. Finally, DiFonzo et al. does not disclose the first electrical sub-connector is configured to be movable relative to the first optical sub-connector, and the second electrical sub-connector is configured to be movable relative to the second optical sub-connector.
Wang et al. discloses an opto-electrical connection system comprising a first connector 102 and a second connector 104, the first connector 104 comprising a plurality of first conductors 122 and a plurality of first optical fibers 124, and the second connector comprising a first plurality of second conductors 132 and a plurality of second optical fibers 124 (Fig. 1; [0029]-[0030]). Wang discloses the first connector 102 includes a first electrical sub-connector (e.g. first electrical sub-connectors formed near the ends of module 220 as shown in Fig. 2) placing each leading end portion of the plurality of first conductors 122 therein and a first optical sub-connector (e.g., first optical sub-connector formed in the middle of module 220 as shown in Fig. 2) placing the plurality of first optical fibers 124 therein (Fig. 2; [0033]-[0034]), wherein the second connector 104 includes a second electrical sub-connector (e.g. second electrical sub-connectors formed near the ends of module 520 as shown in Fig. 5) placing each leading end portion of the plurality of second conductors 132 therein and a second optical sub-connector (e.g., second optical sub-connector formed in the middle of module 520 as shown in Fig. 5) placing the plurality of second optical fibers therein (Fig. 5; [0051]-[0053]), wherein the first electrical sub-connector is configured to be connected to the second electrical sub-connector, and the first optical sub-connector is configured to be connected to the second optical sub-connector (Fig. 1; [0031]). Finally, Wang et al. discloses the first electrical sub-connector is configured to be movable relative to the first optical sub-connector, and the second electrical sub-connector is configured to be movable relative to the second optical sub-connector (Fig. 2; [0039] and [0057]).
The claimed arrangements would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as Wang et al. discloses the arrangements provide connection systems which precisely couple electrical wires and optical fibers in a decreased footprint (Wang et al.: [0006]-[0007]).
Re. Claim 15, DiFonzo et al. discloses the opto-electrical connector as discussed above.
DiFonzo fails to disclose an arrangement wherein the housing includes a plurality of first housing holes respectively placing the plurality of conductors therein, and a plurality of second housing holes respectively placing the plurality of optical fibers therein, and wherein the opto-electrical connector further comprises a positioning structure configured to position each of the plurality of optical fibers with respect to each of the corresponding optical fibers.
Wang et al. discloses an opto-electrical connection system comprising a first connector 102 and a second connector 104, the first connector 104 comprising a plurality of first conductors 122 and a plurality of first optical fibers 124, and the second connector comprising a first plurality of second conductors 132 and a plurality of second optical fibers 124 (Fig. 1; [0029]-[0030]). In Wang et al. a plurality of first housing holes 234 respectively placing the plurality of conductors therein 122, and a plurality of second housing holes 470 respectively placing the plurality of optical fibers 124 therein, and wherein the opto-electrical connector further comprises a positioning structure 222 configured to position each of the plurality of optical fibers with respect to each of the corresponding optical fibers (Figs. 2 and 4; [0036] and [0050]).
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as Wang et al. discloses the arrangements provide connection systems which precisely couple electrical wires and optical fibers in a decreased footprint (Wang et al.: [0006]-[0007]).
Claim(s) 10 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DiFonzo et al. (US 7,841,776 B2) and Nurmi et al. (US 7,374,434 B1).
Re. Claim 10, DiFonzo et al. disclose the opto-electrical connection system as discussed above, wherein the first connector and the second connector are configured to be couplable such that a first longitudinal direction in which the plurality of first conductors extend parallel with a second longitudinal direction in which the plurality of second conductors extend.
That is, DiFonzo et al. does not disclose an arrangement wherein a first longitudinal direction in which the plurality of first conductors extend intersects with a second longitudinal direction in which the plurality of second conductors extend.
Nurmi et al. discloses an opto-electrical connection system having a first connector 10 with a first plurality of conductors 14/18 and a second connector 50 with a second plurality of conductors 52/56, wherein a first longitudinal direction in which the plurality of first conductors extend intersects with a second longitudinal direction in which the plurality of second conductors extend (Figs. 2-4; col. 4 lines 61-62; col. 5 lines 15-21 and 36-43; col. 6 lines 4-10).
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as Nurmi et al. discloses the arrangement allows for effective opto-electro communication across hinge parts during rotation thereof (Nurmi et al.: col. 6 lines 18-21).
Re. Claim 12, DiFonzo et al. and Nurmi et al. render obvious the opto-electrical connection system as discussed above. DiFonzo et al. discloses at least one optical element 732 and 782 configured to optically couple corresponding optical fibers to each other is provided between each of the plurality of first optical fibers and each of the plurality of second optical fibers (Fig. 7; col. 8 lines 52-56). It is noted, lenses 732/782 inherently “bend an optical path between the optical fibers being optically coupled to each other.” 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest an opto-electrical connection system as required by the claim, wherein the first end face of the first housing includes an inclination region inclined with respect to a plane orthogonal to the first longitudinal direction and a planar region extending along the plane orthogonal to the first longitudinal direction, wherein the plurality of first conductors are exposed at the inclination region, and the plurality of first optical fibers are located in a portion corresponding to the planar region.
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 8/4/26
Prosecution Insights