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 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(s) 1-2, 6, and 10-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bumgarner et al (U.S. Patent No. 6,533,216), hereinafter “Bumgarner”.
With respect to Claim 1, Bumgarner, Figures 2-12, teaches a spool 22 for receiving an optical fiber comprising: an outer cylinder portion 24 through which an axis of rotation of the spool extends, the outer cylinder portion comprising (i) an outer surface facing away from the axis of rotation, (ii) an inner surface facing the axis of rotation, the outer cylinder portion extending parallel to the axis of rotation from a first end to a second end, and (iii) a thickness between the outer surface and the inner surface of the outer cylinder portion;
an inner cylinder portion (See Figure 11) through which the axis of rotation of the spool extends, the inner cylinder portion comprising (i) an outer surface facing the inner surface of the outer cylinder portion, (ii) an inner surface facing the axis of rotation and defining an inner channel, the inner cylinder portion extending parallel to the axis of rotation from a first end and a second end;
struts (See Figure 11) extending between the inner surface of the outer cylinder portion and the outer surface of the inner cylinder portion, the struts extending axially along the axis of rotation between (i) a first end terminating near the first end of the inner cylinder portion and the first end of the outer cylinder portion and (ii) a second end terminating near the second end of the inner cylinder portion and the second end of the outer cylinder portion, and the struts positioned radially about the axis of rotation, wherein the outer cylinder portion, the inner cylinder portion and the struts define outer channels; and
a first outboard flange 26 and a second outboard flange 27 each extending radially outward from the outer surface of the outer cylinder portion proximate the first end and the second end respectively of the outer cylinder portion, the first outboard flange, the second outboard flange, and the outer surface of the outer cylinder portion defining a primary barrel portion of the spool;
wherein, the thickness of the outer cylinder portion is substantially constant, along a plane extending through the thickness and the axis of rotation and between the first outboard flange and the second outboard flange.
With respect to Claim 2, Bumgarner further teaches wherein the outer cylinder portion is jointless and without a weld line between the first outboard flange and the second outboard flange.
With respect to Claim 6, Bumgarner further teaches wherein the inner cylinder portion further comprises a thickness between the outer surface and the inner surface, and the thickness of the inner cylinder portion is substantially constant, along a plane extending through the thickness and the axis of rotation and between the first outboard flange and the second outboard flange.
With respect to Claim 10, Bumgarner further teaches wherein the second outboard flange comprises (i) an outer edge that extends radially around the axis of rotation, (ii) an inner side orthogonal to the axis of rotation and that faces the first outboard flange, (iii) an outer side that faces away from the first outboard flange, and (iv) a slot 32 open at the outer edge, the inner side, and the outer side of the second outboard flange, the slot disposed at an acute angle relative to the inner side and extending to the outer surface of the outer cylindrical portion.
With respect to Claim 11, Bumgarner further teaches wherein the second outboard flange is inset axially toward the first outboard flange from the second end of the outer cylinder portion, and a portion of the outer surface of the outer cylinder portion is exposed axially outward of the second outboard flange.
With respect to Claim 12, Bumgarner further teaches wherein the outer cylinder portion, the inner cylinder portion, the struts, the first outboard flange, and the second outboard flange are all integrally formed from a plastic composition in common as an injection molded monolith.
With respect to Claim 13, Bumgarner further teaches a polymeric cushioning material 48 disposed on the outer surface of the outer cylinder portion between the first outboard flange and the second outboard flange.
With respect to Claim 14, Bumgarner further teaches wherein the polymeric cushioning material comprises (i) an outer surface facing away from the axis of rotation, (ii) an inner surface contacting the outer surface of the outer cylinder portion, and (iii) a thickness between the outer surface and the inner surface, wherein the outer cylinder portion further comprises indentations into the outer surface of the outer cylinder portion toward the axis of rotation, each of the indentations extending axially parallel to the axis of rotation between the first outboard flange and the second outboard flange, and the polymeric cushioning material further comprises projections out of the inner surface of the polymeric cushioning material toward the axis of rotation, the projections residing within the indentations of the outer cylinder portion.
With respect to Claim 15, Bumgarner further teaches wherein the polymeric cushioning material is seamless and jointless.
With respect to Claim 16, Bumgarner further teaches wherein the outer cylinder portion, the inner cylinder portion, the struts, the first outboard flange, and the second outboard flange are all integrally formed from a plastic composition in common as an injection molded monolith, and the polymeric cushioning material is over-molded over the outer cylinder portion of the injection molded monolith of the spool between the first outboard flange and the second outboard flange.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bumgarner as applied to Claims 1-2, 6, and 10-16 above, and further in view of Kisselstein et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0098002), hereinafter “Kisselstein”.
With respect to Claim 3, Bumgarner is advanced above.
Bumgarner teaches all the elements of the spool except for at least one projection that projects out of the inner surface of the outer cylinder portion toward the axis of rotation, the at least one projection extending axially parallel to the axis of rotation between the first end and the second end of the outer cylinder portion.
However, Kisselstein, Figures 1 and 6, teaches at least one projection 129 that projects out of the inner surface of the outer cylinder portion 120 toward the axis of rotation, the at least one projection extending axially parallel to the axis of rotation between the first end and the second end of the outer cylinder portion 120.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Bumgarner with at least projection projecting toward the axis of rotation, as taught by Kisselstein, for the purpose of strengthening the outer cylinder portion.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bumgarner as applied to Claims 1-2, 6, and 10-16 above, and further in view of Mikkola et al (U.S. Patent No. 7,814,772), hereinafter “Mikkola”.
With respect to Claim 4, Bumgarner is advanced above.
Bumgarner teaches all the elements of the spool except for the outer cylinder portion further comprising indentations into the outer surface toward the axis of rotation, each of the indentations extending axially parallel to the axis of rotation between the first outboard flange and the second outboard flange.
However, Mikkola, Figure 4, teaches an outer cylinder portion further comprising indentions 11 into the outer surface toward the axis of rotation, each of the indentions extending axially parallel to the axis of rotation between the first outboard flange and the second outboard flange.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Bumgarner with indentations, as taught Mikkola, for the purpose of prevent slippage between the strip and the material being wound.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bumgarner as applied to Claims 1-2, 6, and 10-16 above, and further in view of Kasahara (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0170708).
With respect to Claim 5, Bumgarner is advanced above.
Bumgarner teaches all the elements of the spool except for the inner cylinder portion further comprises projections that project out of the inner surface and into the inner channel toward the axis of rotation, each of the projections extending axially parallel to the axis of rotation between the first end and the second end of the inner cylinder portion.
However, Kasahara, Figures 4-5 and 10-11, teaches an inner cylinder portion further comprises projections that project out of the inner surface and into the inner channel toward the axis of rotation, each of the projections extending axially parallel to the axis of rotation between the first end and the second end of the inner cylinder portion.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Bumgarner with projections in the inner surface of the inner cylinder portion, as taught by Kasahara, for the purpose of providing an engagement surface for a drive element in order to wind or unwind material on the spool or off the spool.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bumgarner as applied to Claims 1-2, 6, and 10-16 above, and further in view of Morin (U.S. Patent No. 2,887,282).
With respect to Claim 7, Bumgarner is advanced above.
Bumgarner teaches all the elements of the spool except for at least some of the struts further comprise an aperture disposed near the second end of the struts.
However, Morin, Figure 2, teaches a strut 17 comprising an aperture disposed near the second end of the struts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Bumgarner with an aperture in the strut, as taught by Morin, for the purpose of making the spool lighter in weight.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8-9 and 17 are 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.
Claims 21 and 22 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to applicants’ remarks on Pages 14-15, last paragraph, it is the applicants’ position that the examiner only pointed to Figure 11 and provided no explanation or without identifying any reference numeral or accompanying textual description. In the instant case, it is the examiner’s position that no explanation was necessary as Figure 11 of the Bumgarner reference is substantially identical to Figure 6 of the instant invention.
With respect to applicants’ remarks on Page 15, item 2, it is the applicants’ position that Claim 1 cannot be anticipated because it does not describe struts in words, and Figure 11 cannot show the axial extent that Claim 1 requires. In the instant case, the examiner interpreted the word strut as just another synonym for ribs. Note that there is no structural difference between Figure 11 of the Bumgarner reference and Figure 6 of the instant invention.
With respect to applicants’ remarks on Page 15, item 3, it is the applicants’ position that Bumgarner does not disclose constant thickness. In the instant case, it is the examiner’s position that there is no structural difference between Figure 11 of the Bumgarner reference and Figure 6 of the instant invention. It is the examiner’s position that the Bumgarner reference does teach this limitation.
With respect to applicants’ remarks on Page 15, item 4, it is the applicants’ position that Bumgarner does not disclose the inner cylinder portion or the outer channels. In the instant case, it is the examiner’s position that there is no structural difference between Figure 11 of the Bumgarner reference and Figure 6 of the instant invention. It is the examiner’s position that the Bumgarner reference does teach this limitation.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM ARAUZ RIVERA whose telephone number is (571)272-6953. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9:00 AM to 8:00 PM MDT.
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, Victoria P. Augustine can be reached at 313-446-4858. 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.
/WILLIAM A. RIVERA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights