CTNF 18/917,038 CTNF 85508 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions 08-25-01 AIA Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 04-17-2026 is acknowledged. 08-06 AIA Claim s 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04-17-2026 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. 07-31-03 AIA Claim s 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for a ratio between a thermal conductivity of the one or more gases and the cladding diameter of the optical fiber of down to about 4.06x10 -3 cal/cm 2 -sec-K , does not reasonably provide enablement for ratios of about 4.00x10 -5 cal/cm 2 -sec-K up to 4.06x10 -3 cal/cm 2 -sec-K . The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make or use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims. The specification describes gases of nitrogen, argon, krypton, and xenon, with the smallest ratio occurring with xenon and a cladding diameter of 115 µm (utilizing the thermal conductivities at 1500 K given in Table 1 of the specification), equaling about 4.06x10 -3 cal/cm 2 -sec-K. Xenon is known in the art to have one of the lowest thermal conductivities of all gases, and the claim requires a maximum cladding diameter of 115 µm. To achieve a ratio of 4.00x10 -5 cal/cm 2 -sec-K with a 115 µm diameter, a gas would need to have a thermal conductivity at 1500 K of 4.6x10 -7 cal/cm-sec-K, which is two orders of magnitude smaller than that of xenon. Thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not be enabled to achieve a ratio of less than about 4.06x10 -3 cal/cm 2 -sec-K because there is not sufficient description of what gas or gases could be utilized to achieve such ratios with a maximum cladding diameter of 115 µm . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dawes ‘676 (US 2021/0347676 A1) in view of Bickham ‘029 (US 2021/0294029 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Dawes ‘676 teaches: drawing, via a draw furnace, an optical fiber comprising a core and a cladding (¶ [0006], [0063], [0088]) moving the optical fiber through a cooling device (treatment region 111, Fig. 1) such that one or more gases surround the optical fiber within the cooling device (¶ [0006], [0088], [0100]). Dawes ‘676 is silent regarding a cladding diameter of the cladding, but Dawes ‘676 does not limit the size of the optical fiber. In analogous art of optical fiber manufacturing, Bickham ‘029 suggests drawing, via a draw furnace, an optical fiber comprising a core and a cladding, the cladding having a cladding diameter less than or equal to about 115 µm for the benefit of enabling a high density of fibers in a fiber cable (¶ [0005], [0006], [0081], [0117]-[0119], [0124], [0139]; Tables 11, 13). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Dawes ‘676 by making the cladding diameter less than or equal to about 115 µm for the benefit of enabling a high density of fibers in a fiber cable, as suggested by Bickham ‘029. Dawes ‘676 further suggests that the one or more gases may be argon (¶ [0100]). Applicant’s specification evidences that argon has a thermal conductivity at 1500 K of 1.27x10 -5 cal/cm-sec-K. Thus in the combination of Dawes ‘676 and Bickham ‘029 as described above, a ratio between a thermal conductivity of the one or more gases and the cladding diameter would fall in the claimed range, for example at a cladding diameter of 105, 110, or 115 µm as in the Examples of Tables 11 and 13 of Bickham ‘029, and at diameters down to about 42 µm, which are included in the ranges suggested by Dawes ‘676 (¶ [0017]; about 1.10x10 -2 at 115 µm and about 3.00x10 -2 at 42 µm). It has been held that where claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05. Regarding claims 2-3, Dawes ‘676 and Bickham ‘029 are silent regarding the claimed ratios between thermal conductivity of the one or more gases and the cladding diameter of the optical fiber. However, Dawes ‘676 suggests that the one or more gases are selected based on their thermal conductivity in order to influence the rate or efficiency of heat transfer from the fiber to control the cooling rate of the fiber (¶ [0100]), wherein controlling the cooling rate controls the fictive temperature of the fiber, which controls attenuation in the fiber (¶ [0076]-[0079]). Thus, along with the suggestions of Bickham ‘029 regarding cladding diameter, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the thermal conductivity of the one or more gases for the benefit of influencing the rate or efficiency of heat transfer from the fiber to control the cooling rate of the fiber, thereby controlling fictive temperature and attenuation of the fiber, as suggested by Dawes ‘676, and thus also optimizing the ratio of the thermal conductivity of the one or more gases to the cladding diameter. Regarding claims 4-5, Dawes ‘676 further teaches a duration for applying the one or more gases to the optical fiber is greater than or equal to about 0.05 seconds, or greater than or equal to about 0.5 seconds (¶ [0006], [0098]), wherein the claimed range overlaps the ranges disclosed by Dawes ‘676. Regarding claim 6, Dawes ‘676 further suggests the one or more gases comprise argon (¶ [0100]). Regarding claims 7-8, Dawes ‘676 further teaches the cooling device cools the optical fiber to a temperature from about 800°C to about 1300°C, or from about 1000°C to about 1200°C (¶ [0088], [0090]), wherein the claimed ranges overlap the ranges disclosed by Dawes ‘676. Regarding claim 9, Dawes ‘676 further teaches a cooling rate of the optical fiber within the cooling devices is less than about 5000°C per second (¶ [0096]), wherein the claimed range overlaps or lies inside the ranges disclosed by Dawes ‘676. Regarding claim 10, Dawes ‘676 further teaches the optical fiber, when entering the cooling device, is at a temperature between about 1050°C and about 1600°C (¶ [0088]-[0089]), wherein the claimed ranges overlap the ranges disclosed by Dawes ‘676. Regarding claims 11 and 12, Dawes ‘676 further teaches the optical fiber has a fictive temperature equal to or less than about 1500°C, or equal to or less than about 1300°C (¶ [0024], [0073]), wherein the claimed ranges overlap the ranges disclosed by Dawes ‘676. Regarding claim 13, Dawes ‘676 further teaches the optical fiber has a region that is doped with germania, that comprises chlorine-doped silica, or comprises fluorine-doped silica, or a combination thereof (¶ [0066], [0068]) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2017/0297947 A1 (Billings) suggests that argon, krypton, or xenon may all be used as inert gases for controlled cooling of drawn optical fibers in order to utilize low thermal conductivity gases (¶ [0080]) to control fictive temperature and attenuation of the fiber (¶ [0062], [0082]). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erin Snelting whose telephone number is (571)272-7169. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:00 to 5:00. 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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached at (571) 270-7001. 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. /ERIN SNELTING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741 Application/Control Number: 18/917,038 Page 2 Art Unit: 1741 Application/Control Number: 18/917,038 Page 3 Art Unit: 1741 Application/Control Number: 18/917,038 Page 4 Art Unit: 1741 Application/Control Number: 18/917,038 Page 5 Art Unit: 1741 Application/Control Number: 18/917,038 Page 6 Art Unit: 1741 Application/Control Number: 18/917,038 Page 7 Art Unit: 1741
Prosecution Insights