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 § 102/103
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed 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(s) 1-9, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1/a2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over JP 2009-176524 (refer to machine translation submitted herein for citations).
Regarding claims 1, and 6-8; 524 teaches a superconductor wire (para. 0001) comprising a plurality of superconductor layers that extend in a longitudinal direction of a substrate and are disposed in parallel in a transverse direction of the substrate (superconductor layers separated by notches of insulating sections; fig. 1, 2, para. 0024, 0035), at least one insulating section that extends in the longitudinal direction of the substrate, is disposed between the plurality of superconductor layers, and electrically insulates the plurality of superconductor layers (superconductor layers separated by notches of insulating sections; fig. 1, 2, para. 0024, 0035), a plurality of connecting sections that are disposed in the insulating sections along a longitudinal direction of the substrate and electrically connected adjacent superconductor layers in a superconducting manner (connecting sections of discontinuities of the insulating sections; fig. 1, 2, para. 0024, 0035), wherein the superconductor wire is spirally wound (para. 0040), wherein the diameter of the spiral is 20 mm (appears to be D; Table 1), the length of the spiral pitch along a winding axis direction is 200 mm (appears to be P; Table 1), the length of each insulating section along the longitudinal direction is 200 mm (appears to be L; para. 0030). It appears that the values of D, P, and L disclosed by 524 meet the limitation of the equations in claim 1 and claim 2 (with the connecting section length (g) being 5 mm; para. 0032). Additionally, it appears that the values for D, P, L, and g are anticipated by 524 as the values for those variables are sufficiently small. In the alternative, it would have been obvious to select the values for the variables through routine experimentation based on the desired properties of the end product absent unexpected results.
Regarding claims 3-5, 524 teaches that the width (length in the transverse direction) of the superconductor layer is 1-2 (wf; notches provided at 1-2 mm intervals; para. 0011) and g is 2-5 mm (para. 0032), and the width of the wire is 3.33 mm (wt; para. 0039). Therefore, it appears that the values for g, wf, and wt overlap with the limitations of the equations of claims 3-5.
Regarding claim 9, 524 teaches a conducting layer covering the superconductor layers (stabilizer layer; para. 0023).
Regarding claim 11, 524 teaches a superconducting cable (para. 0040) comprising a core material (cylindrical metal object; para. 0040), and the superconductor wire of claim 1 spirally wound along the axis of the core material (para. 0040).
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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2009-176524 (refer to machine translation submitted herein for citations) in view of Knoll (US 2005/0139380).
524 teaches a product as described above in claim 9, but fails to teach the conducting layer further covers the insulating sections and the connecting sections.
Knoll, however, teaches a superconducting tape (abstract) wherein a stabilizer layer covers the insulating and connecting sections (para. 0040-0042).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a stabilizer layer covering the insulating and connecting sections of 542 in order to provide a configuration known in the art as taught by Knoll.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL A WARTALOWICZ whose telephone number is (571)272-5957. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am - 5 pm.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/PAUL A WARTALOWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights