DETAILED ACTION
The amendments filed May 19, 2025, has been entered and fully considered. Claims 21-25, and 27-40 are pending in this application. Claims 21, 23, 24, 27-29, 31-34, 38 and 40 are amended.
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 .
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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on July 31, 2025, has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 21-25, 27-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the dielectric" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if “the dielectric” is in reference to the first or second dielectric or another dielectric. Claims 24-25 and 27-30 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 21.
Claim 31 recites the limitation "the dielectric" in lines 12 and 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if “the dielectric” is in reference to the first or second dielectric or another dielectric. Claims 32-37 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 31.
Claim 38 recites the limitation "the dielectric" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if “the dielectric” is in reference to the first or second dielectric or another dielectric. Claims 39-40 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 38.
Claim 40 recites the limitation "the second dielectric shrink tube" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 38 recited “a second dielectric” and “a heat shrink dielectric tube” but does not recite “a second dielectric shrink tube.” Therefore, it is at most unclear to the Examiner if “the second dielectric shrink tube” is one of these three other dielectrics recited in claim 38 or a new dielectric.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claims 21-25, 27, 29-32 and 34-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brannan et al., (hereinafter ‘Brannan,’ U.S. PGPub. No. 2014/0290830) in view of Prakash et al., (hereinafter ‘Prakash,’ U.S. PGPub. 2003/0195499) and Clabburn et al., (hereinafter ‘Clabburn,’ U.S. Pat. 4,431,861).
Regarding claim 21, Brannan (Fig. 2B) disclose a flexible cable assembly for a microwave ablation catheter, comprising: a connection portion (feedline 60) configured to couple the flexible cable assembly (100) to a microwave energy source (40); a radiating section (radiator base segment 116, distal radiating section 120) configured to radiate microwave energy into tissue ([0019] -[0020]; [0070], see microwave applicator or antenna assembly 100 for microwave tissue treatment); a flexible central portion (coaxial feed-line segment 112 of the coaxial cable, impedance step-down segment 114 of the coaxial cable; [0076]) extending between the connection portion (60) and the radiating section (116, 120); an inner conductor extending through the connection portion (inner conductors 212, 222, 232; [0079], “impedance step-down segment 114 may include an inner conductor 222 that is the same as the inner conductor 212 of the coaxial feed-line segment 112.”), the flexible central portion (112, 114), and at least a portion of the radiating section (116, 120); an outer conductive braid extending distally from the connection portion and disposed coaxially around the inner conductor (outer conductor 216, 226, 236 may be a silver-plated copper wire braid; see [0078], [0081], [0084]; conductor 216 and 226 surround dielectric insulator 214, 224 respectively; [0071], feedline 60 transfers microwave energy to microwave tissue treatment device 20); a first dielectric (214) disposed between the inner conductor (212, 222, 232) and the outer conductive braid (outer conductor 216, 226, 236) and extending through the flexible central portion (Fig. 2B); and a second dielectric (224) disposed between the inner conductor (212, 222,232) and the outer conductive braid (outer conductor 216, 226, 236), wherein a proximal end of the second dielectric (224) abuts a distal end of the first dielectric (214).
Brannan is silent regarding wherein the dielectric is in contact with the connection portion to prevent fluid ingress toward a proximal end of the flexible cable assembly,
However, in the same field of endeavor, Prakash teaches a similar ablation cable assembly (microwave antenna assembly 300, 320 in Figs. 22 and 23) comprising a connection portion (connector 304, 324 with connector shell 302 in Figs. 22 and 23) that forms a proximal-most portion of the ablation cable assembly and is configured to couple to a source of electrosurgical energy ([0115] -[0116]). The assembly further includes a feedline (306, 326, including dialectic in indirect contact with the connection portion) that is inserted into and surrounded by the connector shell (302 in Figs. 22 and 23), thereby preventing fluid ingress. Prakash further teaches wherein the outer conductor is in electrical communication with the rigid tube (Figs. 22 and 23 illustrate connectors 304, 324 with connector shell 302 in electrical communication with feedlines 306, 326, respectively, including outer conductor; [0061], [0115] -[0116]). This configuration provides a secure electrical communication path between connector shell (302) and feedline (306, 326) that allows the microwave energy to be transmitted between the two components ([0115]), thereby increasing reliability, safety and efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the ablation cable assembly as taught by Brannan to include wherein the dielectric is in contact with the connection portion to prevent fluid ingress toward a proximal end of the flexible cable assembly, as taught by Prakash in order to provide a secure electrical communication path between connector shell and feedline that allows the microwave energy to be transmitted between the two components ([0115]), thereby increasing reliability, safety and efficiency.
Further, Brannan in view of Prakash are silent regarding a heat shrink dielectric tube overlapping a portion of the first dielectric and a portion of the second dielectric and a portion of the inner conductor and forming a seal about the first dielectric, the second dielectric, and the inner conductor.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Clabburn teaches a similar high voltage cable (1 in Fig. 1) comprising a heat shrink dielectric tube (anti-tracking heat recovered sleeve 9) overlapping the entirety of the cable (1), including a portion of the inner conductor (7, 12). Due to the properties of the heat shrink dielectric tube (9), the heat shrink dielectric tube (9) is configured to prevent fluid ingress between the components of the cable (abstract; col. 6, ll. 58-66, polymeric heat-shrinkable outer sleeve; also see col. 9, ll. 56-68, for sealant with sleeve sealing against moisture ingress and “bonding the heat-shrinkable outer sleeve to the exposed cable jacket and/or to the metal lug attached to the center conductor(s)”; see col. 10, ll. 46-59). It would be advantageous to provide a heat-shrinkable outer sleeve that extends to the termination of high voltage cables in order to “protect[] against moisture and pollutants, if these are present in the surrounding atmosphere” (col. 2, ll. 56-57) and provide a smooth outer profile of the cable, thereby improving safety and overall sleekness. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the flexible cable assembly as taught by Brannan to include a heat shrink dielectric tube overlapping a portion of the first dielectric and a portion of the second dielectric and a portion of the inner conductor and forming a seal about the first dielectric, the second dielectric, and the inner conductor, as taught by Clabburn. Doing so protects “against moisture and pollutants, if these are present in the surrounding atmosphere” from entering the cable (col. 2, ll. 56-57) and provides a smooth outer profile, thereby improving safety and overall sleekness.
Regarding claim 22, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 21. Brannan further discloses wherein the connection portion (60) forms a proximal-most portion of the flexible cable assembly (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 23, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 21. Brannan further discloses wherein the inner conductor includes an exposed distal portion (120) extending distally of a distal end of the second dielectric (224) (Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 24, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 23. Brannan further discloses wherein the first dielectric (214) is in contact with the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor (Fig. 2B) (as broadly claimed, all of the components of the assembly are coupled and in contact with one another, here indirectly).
Regarding claim 25, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 23. Brannan further discloses wherein the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor (120) extends distally of a distal end of the outer conductive braid (Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 27, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 21. Brannan further discloses wherein the second dielectric (224) has a smaller diameter than the first dielectric (214) (see diameters as best illustrated in Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 29, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 27. Brannan (Fig. 2B) discloses wherein the second dielectric (224) surrounds the inner conductor (222).
Regarding claim 30, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 21. Brannan further discloses wherein the flexible cable assembly is configured for use with a bronchoscopic navigation system (see [0066], for endobronchial ablation and bronchoscope).
Further, it is noted a recitation of intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural different between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 31, Brannan discloses (Fig. 2B) a flexible cable assembly (100) for a microwave ablation catheter, comprising: a connection portion (feedline 60) forming a proximal-most portion of the flexible cable assembly (100); a flexible central portion (coaxial feed-line segment 112 of the coaxial cable, impedance step-down segment 114 of the coaxial cable; [0076]) extending distally from the connection portion (60); an inner conductor extending through the connection portion (inner conductors 212, 222, 232; [0079], “impedance step-down segment 114 may include an inner conductor 222 that is the same as the inner conductor 212 of the coaxial feed-line segment 112.”) and the flexible central portion (112, 114); an outer conductive braid electrically coupled to the connection portion and disposed coaxially around the inner conductor (outer conductor 216, 226, 236 may be a silver-plated copper wire braid; see [0078], [0081], [0084]; conductor 216 and 226 surround dielectric insulator 214, 224 respectively; [0071], feedline 60 transfers microwave energy to microwave tissue treatment device 20); a first dielectric (214) disposed between the inner conductor (212, 222, 232) and the outer conductive braid (outer conductor 216, 226, 236) and extending through the connection portion and the flexible central portion (Fig. 2B), wherein the inner conductor (212, 222, 232) includes an exposed distal portion (238, 120) extending distally of a distal end of the dielectric (Fig. 2B); a second dielectric (224) disposed between the inner conductor (212, 222,232) and the outer conductor braid (outer conductor 216, 226, 236), wherein a proximal end of the second dielectric (224) abuts a distal end of the first dielectric (214); a radiating section (radiator base segment 116, distal radiating section 120) configured to radiate microwave energy into tissue, wherein the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor is attached to the radiating section ([0019]-[0020]; [0070], see microwave applicator or antenna assembly 100 for microwave tissue treatment);
Brannan is silent regarding the dielectric in contact with the connection portion to prevent fluid ingress about the inner conductor.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Prakash teaches a similar ablation cable assembly (microwave antenna assembly 300, 320 in Figs. 22 and 23) comprising a connection portion (connector 304, 324 with connector shell 302 in Figs. 22 and 23) that forms a proximal-most portion of the ablation cable assembly and is configured to couple to a source of electrosurgical energy ([0115] -[0116]). The assembly further includes a feedline (306, 326, including dialectic in indirect contact with the connection portion) that is inserted into and surrounded by the connector shell (302 in Figs. 22 and 23), thereby preventing fluid ingress. Prakash further teaches wherein the outer conductor is in electrical communication with the rigid tube (Figs. 22 and 23 illustrate connectors 304, 324 with connector shell 302 in electrical communication with feedlines 306, 326, respectively, including outer conductor; [0061], [0115] -[0116]). This configuration provides a secure electrical communication path between connector shell (302) and feedline (306, 326) that allows the microwave energy to be transmitted between the two components ([0115]), thereby increasing reliability, safety and efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the ablation cable assembly as taught by Brannan to include wherein the dielectric is in contact with the connection portion to prevent fluid ingress about the inner conductor, as taught by Prakash in order to provide a secure electrical communication path between connector shell and feedline that allows the microwave energy to be transmitted between the two components ([0115]), thereby increasing reliability, safety and efficiency.
Further, Brannan in view of Prakash are silent regarding a heat shrink dielectric tube overlapping a portion of the first dielectric, the second dielectric and a portion of the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor and forming a seal about the first dielectric, the second dielectric, and the inner conductor.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Clabburn teaches a similar high voltage cable (1 in Fig. 1) comprising a heat shrink dielectric tube (anti-tracking heat recovered sleeve 9) overlapping the entirety of the cable (1), including a portion of the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor (7, 12). The heat shrink dielectric tube (9) forms a seal about the components of the cable (abstract; col. 6, ll. 58-66, polymeric heat-shrinkable outer sleeve; also see col. 9, ll. 56-68, for sealant with sleeve sealing against moisture ingress and “bonding the heat-shrinkable outer sleeve to the exposed cable jacket and/or to the metal lug attached to the center conductor(s)”; see col. 10, ll. 46-59). It would be advantageous to provide a heat-shrinkable outer sleeve that extends to the termination of high voltage cables in order to “protect[] against moisture and pollutants, if these are present in the surrounding atmosphere” (col. 2, ll. 56-57) and provide a smooth outer profile of the cable, thereby improving safety and overall sleekness. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the flexible cable assembly as taught by Brannan in view of Prakash to include a heat shrink dielectric tube overlapping a portion of the first dielectric, the second dielectric and a portion of the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor and forming a seal about the first dielectric, the second dielectric, and the inner conductor, as taught by Clabburn. Doing so protects “against moisture and pollutants, if these are present in the surrounding atmosphere” from entering the cable (col. 2, ll. 56-57) and provides a smooth outer profile, thereby improving safety and overall sleekness.
Regarding claim 32, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 31. Brannan further discloses wherein the second dielectric (224) has a smaller diameter than the first dielectric (214) (Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 34, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 32. Brannan further discloses wherein the second dielectric (224) surrounds the inner conductor (222).
Regarding claim 35, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 31. Brannan further discloses wherein the flexible cable assembly is configured for use with a bronchoscopic navigation system (see [0066], for endobronchial ablation and bronchoscope).
Further, it is noted a recitation of intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural different between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 36, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 31. Brannan further discloses wherein the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor extends distally of a distal end of the other conductive braid (120 in Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 37, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 31. Brannan further discloses wherein the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor (120) is soldered to the radiating section (radiator base segment 116, distal radiating section 120; [0088], “The distal radiating section 120 is an elongated conductor which is soldered, crimped, or welded onto the distal end of the inner conductor 232 of the radiator base segment 116.”).
Claims 28 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn as applied to claims 21 and 31 above, and further in view of Kim et al., (hereinafter Kim, U.S. PGPub. No. 2011/0238054).
Regarding claim 28, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 27. Brannan further discloses wherein the outer conductive braid (outer conductor 216, 226, 236) surrounds the first dielectric (214), and the second dielectric (224).
Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn are silent regarding wherein the outer conductive braid surrounds the heat shrink dielectric tube.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim (Fig. 6) teaches a similar ablation cable assembly (601) comprising “an inner conductor 210, a dielectric material 240 disposed coaxially around the inner conductor 210, and an outer conductor 260, and may include an insulator sleeve 270 disposed around the dielectric material 240.” ([0068]). Kim teaches the “insulator sleeve 270 may be formed from a material with a dielectric constant that is higher than the dielectric constant of the dielectric material 240, e.g., to maximize energy radiated into the surrounding medium, e.g., tissue.” ([0055], also see insulator sleeve formed of heat shrink). As best illustrated in Fig.6, the outer conductor (660) surrounds the heat shrink dielectric tube (270). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the ablation cable assembly as taught by Brannan in view Prakash and Clabburn to include wherein the outer conductive braid surrounds the heat shrink dielectric tube, as taught by Kim in order to maximize energy radiated into the surrounding medium, such as tissue, thereby improving accuracy and efficiency of treatment. Further, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 33, Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn teach all of the limitations of the flexible cable assembly according to claim 32. Brannan further discloses wherein the outer conductive braid (outer conductor 216, 226, 236) surrounds the second dielectric (224).
Brannan in view of Prakash and Clabburn are silent regarding wherein the outer conductive braid surrounds the heat shrink dielectric tube
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim (Fig. 6) teaches a similar ablation cable assembly (601) comprising “an inner conductor 210, a dielectric material 240 disposed coaxially around the inner conductor 210, and an outer conductor 260, and may include an insulator sleeve 270 disposed around the dielectric material 240.” ([0068]). Kim teaches the “insulator sleeve 270 may be formed from a material with a dielectric constant that is higher than the dielectric constant of the dielectric material 240, e.g., to maximize energy radiated into the surrounding medium, e.g., tissue.” ([0055], also see insulator sleeve formed of heat shrink). As best illustrated in Fig.6, the outer conductor (660) surrounds the heat shrink dielectric tube (270). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the ablation cable assembly as taught by Brannan in view Prakash and Clabburn to include wherein the outer conductive braid surrounds the heat shrink dielectric tube, as taught by Kim in order to maximize energy radiated into the surrounding medium, such as tissue, thereby improving accuracy and efficiency of treatment. Further, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claims 38-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brannan in view of Clabburn.
Regarding claim 38, Brannan (Fig. 2B) discloses a flexible cable assembly (100) for a microwave ablation catheter, comprising: a connection portion (feedline 60) forming a proximal-most portion of the flexible cable assembly (100); an inner conductor extending distally from the connection portion (inner conductors 212, 222, 232; [0079], “impedance step-down segment 114 may include an inner conductor 222 that is the same as the inner conductor 212 of the coaxial feed-line segment 112.”); an outer conductive braid disposed coaxially around the inner conductor and extending distally from the connection portion (outer conductor 216, 226, 236 may be a silver-plated copper wire braid; see [0078], [0081], [0084]; conductor 216 and 226 surround dielectric insulator 214, 224 respectively; [0071], feedline 60 transfers microwave energy to microwave tissue treatment device 20); a first dielectric (214) disposed between the inner conductor (212, 222, 232) and the outer conductive braid (outer conductor 216, 226, 236), wherein the inner conductor (212, 222,232) includes an exposed distal portion (238, 120) extending distally of a distal end of the dielectric (214, 224) and a distal end of the outer conductive braid (Fig. 2B); a second dielectric (224) disposed between the inner conductor (212, 222,232) and the outer conductor braid (outer conductor 216, 226, 236), wherein a proximal end of the second dielectric (224) abuts a distal end of the first dielectric (214); a radiating section (radiator base segment 116, distal radiating section 120) configured to radiate microwave energy into tissue ([0019] -[0020]; [0070], see microwave applicator or antenna assembly 100 for microwave tissue treatment), wherein the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor (238, 120) is attached to the radiating section (116).
Brannan is silent regarding a heat shrink dielectric tube overlapping a portion of the first dielectric, the second dielectric, and a portion of the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor, the heat shrink dielectric tube configured to prevent fluid ingress between the first dielectric, the second dielectric, and the inner conductor.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Clabburn teaches a similar high voltage cable (1 in Fig. 1) comprising a heat shrink dielectric tube (anti-tracking heat recovered sleeve 9) overlapping the entirety of the cable (1), including a portion of the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor (7, 12). Due to the properties of the heat shrink dielectric tube (9), the heat shrink dielectric tube (9) is configured to prevent fluid ingress between the components of the cable (abstract; col. 6, ll. 58-66, polymeric heat-shrinkable outer sleeve; also see col. 9, ll. 56-68, for sealant with sleeve sealing against moisture ingress and “bonding the heat-shrinkable outer sleeve to the exposed cable jacket and/or to the metal lug attached to the center conductor(s)”; see col. 10, ll. 46-59). It would be advantageous to provide a heat-shrinkable outer sleeve that extends to the termination of high voltage cables in order to “protect[] against moisture and pollutants, if these are present in the surrounding atmosphere” (col. 2, ll. 56-57) and provide a smooth outer profile of the cable, thereby improving safety and overall sleekness. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the flexible cable assembly as taught by Brannan to include a heat shrink dielectric tube overlapping a portion of the first dielectric, the second dielectric, and a portion of the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor, the heat shrink dielectric tube configured to prevent fluid ingress between the first dielectric, the second dielectric, and the inner conductor, as taught by Clabburn. Doing so protects “against moisture and pollutants, if these are present in the surrounding atmosphere” from entering the cable (col. 2, ll. 56-57) and provides a smooth outer profile, thereby improving safety and overall sleekness.
Regarding claim 39, Brannan further discloses wherein the exposed distal portion of the inner conductor (120) is soldered to the radiating section (radiator base segment 116, distal radiating section 120; [0088], “The distal radiating section 120 is an elongated conductor which is soldered, crimped, or welded onto the distal end of the inner conductor 232 of the radiator base segment 116.”).
Regarding claim 40, Brannan further discloses wherein the second dielectric shrink tube (224) surrounds a portion of the inner conductor (inner conductors 212, 222, 232).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 21-25 and 27-40 have been considered but are moot because the amendment has necessitated a new ground of rejection.
Applicant argument (p. 7-8) that Brannan and Prakash do not teach the amendment is acknowledges. However, it is the Examiner’s position that Clabburn remedies any perceived deficiencies in these references.
Applicant notes (p. 8), “Kim fails to remedy these deficiencies, nor was it cited for this purpose.” The Examiner agrees with this statement.
Applicant also argues “[a]mended independent claims 31 and 38 recite features similar to amended independent claim 21 and are thus allowable for similar reasons.” For the same reasons as applied to claim 21, it is the Examiner’s position that the independent claims are not allowable in view of the prior art.
No further arguments have been set forth regarding the dependent claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE A DEDOULIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2459. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am to 5pm.
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, Linda Dvorak can be reached at 571-272-4764. 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.
/LINDA C DVORAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/C.A.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3794