Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/909,362

Cable comprising a semiconductive layer with a smooth surface

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Sep 03, 2022
Examiner
MAYO III, WILLIAM H
Art Unit
2841
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Nexans
OA Round
4 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
73%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
963 granted / 1251 resolved
+9.0% vs TC avg
Minimal -4% lift
Without
With
+-3.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
64 currently pending
Career history
1315
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
52.4%
+12.4% vs TC avg
§102
34.2%
-5.8% vs TC avg
§112
5.3%
-34.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1251 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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. 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. 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. Claim(s) 1-11, 13-15, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sutton (US Pat Num 2015/0087787) in view of Lui et al (Pub Num 2017/0169920, herein referred to as Liu). Sutton discloses a polymeric blend of polypropylene homopolymer and propylene-α-olefin interpolymer for coating wires and cables (abstract), while having sufficient dielectric strength (Paragraph 6). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Sutton discloses an electrical cable that may comprising at least one elongated electrically conductive element, and at least one semiconductive layer surrounding said elongated electrically conductive element (Paragraph 46), wherein the semiconductive layer is obtained from a polymer composition comprising at least one homophasic propylene polymer, and at least one homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene (Paragraph 15), wherein the polymer composition comprises at least one conductive filler (i.e. Paragraph 87, HFDK-0587 BK semiconducting materials from Dow). With respect to claim 3, Sutton discloses that the homophasic propylene polymer is a copolymer of propylene and ethylene (Paragraph 22). With respect to claim 4, Sutton discloses that the polymer composition comprises at least 20% by weight of the homophasic propylene polymer, relative to the total weight of the polymer composition (Paragraph 27). With respect to claim 5, Sutton discloses that the polymer composition comprises at most 80% by weight of the homophasic propylene polymer, relative to the total weight of the polymer composition (Paragraph 17). With respect to claim 6, Sutton discloses the homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene is a homophasic copolymer of propylene and ethylene (Paragraph 22). With respect to claim 7, Sutton discloses that the polymer composition comprises at least 10% by weight of the homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene relative to the total weight of the polymer composition (Paragraph 27). With respect to claim 8, Sutton discloses that the polymer composition comprises at most 50% by weight of the polymer of the homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene, relative to the total weight of the polymer composition (Paragraph 27). With respect to claim 9, Sutton discloses that the homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene is obtained by a copolymerization process using a metallocene catalyst (Paragraph 16). With respect to claim 10, Sutton discloses that the polymer composition comprises at most 50% by weight of the polymer of the homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene, relative to the total weight of the polymer composition (Paragraph 27). With respect to claim 11, Sutton discloses that the polymeric composition, wherein the ethylene of the homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene represents at most 15 mol% relative to the total number of moles of homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene (Paragraph 23). With respect to claim 13, Sutton discloses that the semiconductive layer may be non-crosslinked layer (Paragraph 45). With respect to claims 14-15, Sutton discloses that the electric cable may also comprise an electrically insulating layer surrounding the elongated electrically conductive element and the electrically insulating layer surrounding a semiconductive layer (Paragraph 46). With respect to claim 18, Sutton discloses an electrical cable comprising at least one elongated electrically conductive element, and at least one semiconductive layer surrounding said elongated electrically conductive element (Paragraph 46), wherein the semiconductive layer is obtained from a polymer composition comprising at least one homophasic propylene polymer, and at least one homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene (Paragraph 15), wherein the polymer composition comprises at least one conductive filler (i.e. Paragraph 87, HFDK-0587 BK semiconducting materials from Dow). However, Sutton doesn’t necessarily disclose the at least one filler being a carbon based electrically conductive filler other than acetylene or furnace blacks (claim 1), the polymer composition comprises at least 6% by weight of conductive filler, relative to the total weight of the polymer composition (claim 2), nor the semiconductive layer being in direct contact with the elongated electrically conductive element (claim 17), nor the conductive filler being furnace black and having a smooth surface (claim 18). Lui teaches an electrical cable (Fig 1) comprising a semiconducting layer made of a polymeric composition that exhibits increased thermal conductance while still providing desired electrical, physical, and mechanical properties (Paragraph 3). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Lui teaches an electrical cable (Fig 1) comprising at least one elongated electrically conductive element (1), and at least one semiconductive layer (2) surrounding said elongated electrically conductive element (11), wherein the semiconductive layer (2) is obtained from a polymer composition comprising at least at least one homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene (Paragraph 10-12), wherein the polymer composition comprises at least one conductive filler being a carbon based electrically conductive filler other than acetylene or furnace blacks, such as channel carbon black, thermal carbon black, lamp carbon black, and graphitized carbon black (Paragraph 16). With respect to claim 2, Lui teaches that the polymeric composition comprises at least 6% by weight of electrical filler (i.e. 10-30%,) relative to the total weight of the polymer composition (Paragraph 4). With respect to claim 17, Lui teaches that the semiconductive layer (2) is in direct physical contact with the elongated electrically conductive element (1, Fig 1). With respect to claim 18, Lui teaches an electrical cable (Fig 1) comprising at least one elongated electrically conductive element (1), and at least one semiconductive layer (2) surrounding said elongated electrically conductive element (11), wherein the semiconductive layer (2) is obtained from a polymer composition comprising at least at least one homophasic copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene (Paragraph 10-12), wherein the polymer composition comprises at least one conductive filler being made of furnace black (Paragraph 16), wherein the cable (Fig 1) has a smooth surface. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art of cables at the time the invention was made to modify the electric cable of Sutton to comprise the conductive filler material composition as taught by Lui because Lui teaches that such a configuration provides an electrical cable (Fig 1) comprising a semiconducting layer made of a polymeric composition that exhibits increased thermal conductance while still providing desired electrical, physical, and mechanical properties (Paragraph 3). Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sutton (US Pat Num 2015/0087787) in view of Lui (Pub Num 2017/0169920), as applied to claim 1 above (herein referred to as modified Sutton), further in view of Bareggi et al (WO Pat Num 2018/100409 A, herein referred to as Bareggi). Modified Sutton discloses a polymeric blend of polypropylene homopolymer and propylene-α-olefin interpolymer for coating wires and cables (abstract), while having sufficient dielectric strength (Paragraph 6), as disclosed above with respect to claim 1. However, modified Sutton doesn’t necessarily disclose polymer composition also comprising a dielectric fluid (claim 12). Bareggi teaches an electrical cable (Fig 1) comprising a polymeric composition that favorably influences the electrical behavior at high voltages of insulating systems (Page 3, lines 26-29), wherein the additional of dielectric fluid may reduce the risk of formation of morphological defects (Page 3, lines 16-18). Specifically, with respect to claim 12, Bareggi teaches an electrical cable (10) comprising at least one elongated electrically conductive element (11), and at least one semiconductive layer (12) surrounding and in physical contact with said elongated electrically conductive element (11), wherein the semiconductive layer (11) may be obtained from a polymer composition comprising at least one propylene polymer, and at least one copolymer of a C3-C6 olefin and ethylene (Pages 3-4, lines 30-33 & 1-4, respectively), wherein the polymer composition may also comprising a dielectric fluid (Page 6, lines 11-19). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art of cables at the time the invention was made to modify the electric cable of Sutton to comprise the polymeric composition additions configuration as taught by Bareggi because Bareggi teaches that such a configuration provides an electrical cable (Fig 1) comprising a polymeric composition that favorably influences the electrical behavior at high voltages of insulating systems (Page 3, lines 26-29), wherein the additional of dielectric fluid may reduce the risk of formation of morphological defects (Page 3, lines 16-18). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-15 and 17-18 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to the enclosed PTO-892 form for the citation of pertinent art in the present case, both of which disclose cables comprising semiconductive layers utilizing other carbon blacks other than acetylene or furnace blacks. 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. Communication Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM H MAYO III whose telephone number is (571)272-1978. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Thurs (5:30a-3:00p) Fri 5:30a-2p (w/alternating Fridays off). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Imani Hayman can be reached on (571) 270-5528. 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. /William H. Mayo III/ William H. Mayo III Primary Examiner Art Unit 2847 WHM III November 4, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 03, 2022
Application Filed
Jul 27, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 16, 2024
Response Filed
Nov 02, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 18, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 18, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 31, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 15, 2025
Interview Requested
Jun 03, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 03, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 27, 2025
Interview Requested
Jul 09, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 09, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 11, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603195
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR COOLING AN ELECTRIC CHARGING CABLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591029
THERMALLY ISOLATING CABLING ASSEMBLIES, SYSTEMS USING THERMALLY ISOLATING CABLING ASSEMBLIES, AND METHODS OF FABRICATING THERMALLY ISOLATING CABLING ASSEMBLIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593429
NOISE SUPPRESSION SHEET AND CABLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586694
MULTICORE CABLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580377
FIRE AND EXPLOSION PROOF STRUCTURE FOR HIGH-VOLTAGE CABLE JOINT AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
73%
With Interview (-3.8%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1251 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month