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 Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to the claims filed on 11/18/2025 are acknowledged and entered. According to the Amendments to the claims, claims 14-15 has /have been amended, claims 1-5 were previously cancelled, claims 18-19 has /have been added. Accordingly, claims 6-19 are pending in the application with claims 6-13 and 16-17 previously withdrawn. An action on the merits for claims 14-15 and 18-19 are as follow.
The previous 112 (b) Claim Rejections and objections to the drawings are withdrawn in accordance with applicant's amendment to the claims and the drawings with no new matter added.
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.
Claims 14-15 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “an adherend” in line 6 rendering the claim indefinite. It is unclear what the relation between this “an adherend” and a wire member-equipped adherend mentioned in line 1 are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the heat generation body” in line 10 rendering the claim indefinite. It is unclear what the relation between this “the heat generation body” and at least one heat generation body mentioned in line 4 are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “a heat generation in the at least one heat generation body” in line 11 rendering the claim indefinite. It is unclear what the relation between this “a heat generation in the at least one heat generation body” and at least one heat generation body configured to generate heat mentioned in line 4 are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “heat is applied is provided on an opposite side of the heat generation body” in line 5 rendering the claim indefinite. It is unclear what the relation between this “heat is applied is provided on an opposite side of the heat generation body” and at least one heat generation body configured to generate heat mentioned in claim 14 line 4 are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
The rest of the claims are also been rejected because each claim depends on a rejected claim.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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.
Claims 14-15 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MIZUNO et al. (US 2020/0172027 A1) in view of Suzuki et al. (JP 2019 186051 A).
Regarding Independent Claim 14, MIZUNO et al. discloses a wiring member-equipped adherend (sheet material 12, [0047], Fig 3), comprising:
a wiring member including at least one wire-like transmission member (electrical wire 20, [0052]) having a core wire (core wire 22 may be a solid wire or a stranded wire, [0052]) and a covering (an insulating covering 24 directly covering the core wire 22, [0052]) surrounding the core wire (see Fig 3), and
an adherend (a main surface 12a of 12, [0052], Fig 3), wherein
MIZUNO et al. discloses the invention as claimed and as discussed above; except does not disclose at least one heat generation body configured to generate heat by induction heating; and, wherein the at least one heat generation body is a separate metallic member provided between the wiring member and a fixation surface of the adherend, the heat generation body surrounds a periphery of the wiring member, and the wiring member is configured to be fixed to the fixation surface of the adherend by a heat generation in the at least one heat generation body.
Suzuki et al. teach a wiring member (wires 7, P 5 of 8, line 2, Fig 4) including at least one wire-like transmission member having a core wire and a covering surrounding the core wire (an insulated electric wire 8, P 5 of 8, line 4, Fig 4. Note: taught by MIZUNO et al. already), and at least one heat generation body (12 is a metal tape winding layer, P 5 of 8, line 31, Fig 4) configured to generate heat by induction heating (welding may also be performed using a heating means such as… induction heating. [0130], MIZUNO et al.); and, wherein the at least one heat generation body is a separate metallic member (metal tape winding layer 12 is a separate metallic member, P 5 of 8, line 31, Fig 4) provided between the wiring member and a fixation surface of the adherend (12 provided between 7 and a fixation surface- outer layer 15, P 5 of 8, line 32, Fig 4. Note: “a fixation surface of the adherend”: a main surface 12a of 12, [0052], Fig 3,taught by MIZUNO et al. already), the heat generation body surrounds a periphery of the wiring member (12 surrounds a periphery of 7, Fig 4), and the wiring member is configured to be fixed to the fixation surface of the adherend (holding part 30 is welded /induction heating to the sheet material 12 by… holding part 30 is fixed to the sheet material 12, thus the electrical wires 20 are fixed to the sheet material 12, [0053, 0130], Fig 3, MIZUNO et al.) by a heat generation in the at least one heat generation body (a heat generation in the metal tape winding layer 12, P 5 of 8, line 31, Fig 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify MIZUNO et al. with Suzuki et al.’s further teaching of at least one heat generation body configured to generate heat by induction heating; and, wherein the at least one heat generation body is a separate metallic member provided between the wiring member and a fixation surface of the adherend, the heat generation body surrounds a periphery of the wiring member, and the wiring member is configured to be fixed to the fixation surface of the adherend by a heat generation in the at least one heat generation body; because Suzuki et al. teach, in Abstract, of providing an excellent electric cable in high frequency property and flexibility with a reduced diameter for easy connection during operation.
Claim 15, wherein a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer (holding part 30 can be formed by extrusion-molding resin around the electrical wires 20, [0056]) adhering to the wiring member (inner side of 30 adhering to 22 through 24, Fig 3) is provided on a side of the heat generation body (12 is a metal tape winding layer, P 5 of 8, line 31, Fig 4, Suzuki et al.), and
a joint layer configured to have jointing properties (holding part 30 can be formed by extrusion-molding resin around the electrical wires 20, [0056]; outer side of 30 is a joint layer having joint properties, Fig 3) in a state in which heat is applied (holding part 30 is welded /induction heating to the sheet material 12, [0053, 0130], Fig 3) is provided on an opposite side of the heat generation body (12 is a metal tape winding layer, P 5 of 8, line 31, Fig 4, Suzuki et al.) from the pressure-sensitive adhesive layer (provided on an opposite side from the pressure-sensitive adhesive layer, [0053], Fig 3).
Claim 18, wherein the covering (the insulated covering of the insulated electric wire 8, P 5 of 8, line 4, Fig 4. Note: taught by MIZUNO et al. already) is positioned between the core wire (the insulated electric wire 8, P 5 of 8, line 4, Fig 4. Note: taught by MIZUNO et al. already) and the heat generation body (the heat generation body 12, P 5 of 8, line 31, Fig 4, Suzuki et al.).
Claim 19, wherein the wiring member equipped-adherend includes a joint layer (14 is a resin tape layer, P 5 of 8, line 32, Fig 4, Suzuki et al.), and the heat generation body is positioned between the covering and the joint layer (12 is positioned between the insulated covering of the insulated electric wire 8 and 14, Fig 4, Suzuki et al.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 14-15 and 18-19 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office Action as stated above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is advised to refer to the Notice of References Cited for pertinent prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUANGYUE CHEN whose telephone number is 571/272-8224. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00-5:00 EST.
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, supervisor Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on 571/270-5569, supervisor Kosanovic Helena can be reached on 571/272-9059, supervisor Steven Crabb can be reached on 571/270-5095, or supervisor Edward Landrum can be reached on 571/272-5567. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571/273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866/217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800/786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571/272-1000.
/KUANGYUE CHEN/
Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761