DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The Examiner notes a preliminary amendment was filed on February 27, 2025. Claims 1, 3 and 4 are pending. Claim 1 has been amended and claim 2 has been canceled.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1, 3 in the reply filed on January 25, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Accordingly, claim 4 has been withdrawn from consideration.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim 1, 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe JP2017032721A in view of Ota WO2023127828A1 (with US20240319464A1 acting as the official translation thereof).
Regarding claim 1:
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Tanabe is directed to a method of manufacturing optical fiber ribbons and apparatus for performing such a method (page 1 lines 5 – 15).
As depicted in Fig. 1 (reproduced above), Tanabe discloses that the apparatus comprises:
a coating die 12 that collectively coats three or more single-core coated optical fiber in an uncured resin (page 5 lines 20 – page 6 line 5);
a rotary blade unit 15 that cuts into the uncured resin (page 6 lines 5 – 20), comprising a plurality of blades that are disposed to cut between the cores to form cut-off portions 7, wherein the blade rotates in the downstream direction (page 6 lines 5 – 25; page 7 line 20 – page 8 line 5);
an excess resin suction unit 16 having a suction opening vertically aligned with the rotary blade unit configured to aspirate excess uncured resin removed during a separation operation; and
UV curing units 17 and 19 that cures the remaining resin to a final states (page 6 line 15 – page 7 line 5).
Tanabe further discloses a method of manufacturing an optical fiber ribbon using the apparatus described above, sequentially comprising [upstream to downstream] (page 2 lines 20 – page 3 line 6): arranging three or more single-core coated optical fibers in parallel; covering the three or more single-core coated optical fibers with an uncured resin; partially separating [removing] between adjacent single-core coated optical fibers using the plurality of rotary blades; and curing the partially-separated, resin-coated single-core coated optical fibers with the UV curing units.
Tanabe does not expressly teach the recited positioning part with the recited plurality of outlet openings covered by the suction opening.
Ota is directed to an optical fiber ribbon comprising a plurality of single-core coated optical fibers that are intermittently connected/separated (Abstract). Ota describes a separating die 60, which serves as a positioning unit through - which the tape containing the mono-coated optical fiber passes within and is equipped with multiple rotary blades, and describes through holes for passing the mono-coated optical fiber 100 and multiple slits that communicate with the through holes and allow the rotary blades to rotate inside (paragraphs [0037] – [0040], Figures 5-6). The die and blades work together to form separating portions 4 and coupling portions 3 in the tape containing the mono-coated optical fiber ([0044] – [0046]); such slots enable uniform separating and coupling portions that improve on the bending strain property of optical fiber ribbons manufactured using inter alia the separating die ([0009]). In another embodiment, Ota discloses that a separation die may have a resin suction apparatus installed within ([0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the positioning die of Ota in the apparatus of Tanabe under the suction device (and thus the suction opening covering the plurality of outlet openings, including at its upstream and downstream ends) because Ota teaches that such a positioning die includes slots that enable separating and coupling portions that improve on the bending strain property of optical fiber ribbons manufactured using inter alia the separating die.
Additionally and optionally, with regards to end portions of the suction opening being disposed to end portions of the positioning part, the Examiner notes that such a Ota’s separation die and Tanabe’s suction device are arranged to have an end near the radius of the rotary blade and perform functions that would be the same whether as spaced, separate parts, or as one unit. Ota further teaches that a resin suction apparatus may be contained within a separation die. Outside a showing of criticality or insight contrary to the understandings and expectations of the art, an additional prima facie case of obviousness exists where parts having the same function are integrated as one unit as opposed to separate parts. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Regarding claim 3:
While Tanabe in view of Ota does not expressly teach the length of the suction opening in an arrangement direction (defined as the direction perpendicular from the direction of feed and rotary blades, see paragraph [0035] of the instant specification and Fig. 3A’s D1) has a length between 100% to 120% with respect to a length of the plurality of outlet openings in the same arrangement direction, Tanabe does disclose that the rotary blade unit comprises rotary blades perpendicular from the direction of feed and coaxial to one another (Fig. 1; page 2 lines 25 – 30, page 3 lines 10 – 20). The blades are also arranged to make partial cuts in the direction of the ribbon feed/blade rotation direction.
Finally, Tanabe discloses that the purpose of the suction device is to remove excess resin that was freed from the rotary blade cutting (page 6 lines 5 – 15). Since there are multiple rotary blades in the transverse [arrangement] direction and each would cast off excess resin, it would have been readily apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art to have sized a suction unit to sufficiently capture the produced excess resin for at least workplace cleanliness and to remove a source of adventitious contamination to the non-cut parts of the disclosed optical fiber resin.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the separation die’s rotary blade-set transverse length and the suction unit’s transverse length to at least be equal [100%] or about equal [e.g. 120% larger suction opening length] in order to effectively capture excess resin as desired by Tanabe and suggested by both Tanabe and Oda.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE I HERNANDEZ-KENNEY whose telephone number is (571)270-5979. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-3:30.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached on (571) 272-1295. 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.
/JOSE I HERNANDEZ-KENNEY/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717