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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) rejected in the prior office action have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. As noted in the interview 4/10/2026, the claims recite language that require at least 3-rows. However, also noted by Examiner was that providing additional rows in a connector or ferrule would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,134,494 to Wang et al. in view of US 2011/0064358 to Nishimura.
Wang discloses in the abstract and figures 1-4, an upper body collimator comprising:
a first body (320) including more than two rows of fiber alignment holes (128a-c), wherein an individual row of the two rows of fiber alignment holes includes at least two fiber alignment holes (the abstract of Wang discloses that there are fibers which extend into the holes at 136a-d);
one or more alignment features configured to mate and/or demate with a second body external to the upper body collimator (column 9, lines 21-24 describe mechanical alignment features such as pins or clips); and
one or more optical structures including one or more: waveguides, lenses, mirrors, and/or light manipulating surfaces (column 10, line 11);
wherein the two rows of fiber alignment holes and the one or more optical structures are collectively configured to emit collimated light (450) across an interface with the second body, with a tolerance to lateral and/or angular misalignment.
As to claims 2-3, figures 2-4 depict optical alignment.
As to claim 4, the upper body is removable via connector (MT connectors disclosed in column 9, lines 21-24).
As to claim 5, a light redirecting member can be a mirror (description for figures 6A-6C).
As to claim 7, the light is configured to couple with other collimating elements (figures 2-4).
However, Wang fails to explicitly disclose a lateral and angular misalignment tolerance in the range claimed (20um and 1 degree, respectively). It is noted that the goal of Wang is to reduce and minimizer misalignment (column 8, lines 9-44).
Further, Wang fails to disclose more than two rows of holes. As noted in the Response to Arguments above, adding more holes would be generally within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Nishimura discloses such an addition between figures 4 and 5. As shown, multiple rows are added and their respective components such as lenses (figure 6 and paragraphs 96-99).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to arrange the components in Wang to maximize alignment and minimize losses and add rows as taught by Nishimura to add capacity.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Nishimura (hereinafter WiN).
WiN discloses the invention as claimed including 350micron diameter vias. WiN discloses that these diameters (D) and the pitch can be optimized so that ribbons of the fiber can be un-singulated to provide a connection (column 10, lines 33-53).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as a matter of design choice to optimize the size and pitch of the fiber openings to optimize the connection for packaging size and transmission of optical signals.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WiN.
WiN discloses the invention as claimed but does not disclose polarization independent light operating at a wavelength range spanning at least one of O- (1260nm-1360nm), C- (1530nm-1565nm) and L- (1565nm-1625nm) bands. It is noted that these bands are commonly known and used. Further, WiN discloses wavelength selective features such as gratings. Although WiN does not disclose the specific bands claimed, one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the wavelength selective features disclosed could be adapted to select the wavelength bands in the ranges claimed as a matter of design choice for the intended use.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric K Wong whose telephone number is (571)272-2363. The examiner can normally be reached M-Tu, Th-F 8A-6P.
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, Thomas Hollweg can be reached at 571-270-1739. 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.
ERIC K. WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2874
/Eric Wong/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights