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 Amendment
Applicant's request for reconsideration of the finality of the rejection of the last Office action is persuasive and, therefore, the finality of that action is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 1/15/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 2, and 4–8 under 35 USC 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 4–8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 4951704 B1, “ ’704” in view of Watabe (JP 2016105406 A).
’704 teaches the formation of insulated electric wires for transmission cables, wherein at least one conductor 1 is covered on its peripheral surface by an insulating layer 2. ’704 abstract, Fig. 1. The insulating layer may comprise polyethylene or polypropylene, olefinic resins, and an antioxidant that is blended at levels up to 1.5 parts by mass of the polyethylene resin. Id. abstract, Description. The antioxidant may comprise either semi-hindered or less-hindered phenol-based structures. Id. Description. The insulating layer may further comprise a metal deactivator. Id.
’704 fails to teach the use of an antioxidant comprising a phenolic antioxidant and sulfur-based antioxidant, except for a sulfur-containing phenolic antioxidant.
Watabe teaches the creation of an insulating resin composition for an insulated wire that achieves excellent heat aging resistance, while suppressing deterioration in dielectric properties. Watabe abstract. The insulating resin composition comprises an olefinic resin and an antioxidant, wherein the antioxidant is a blend of a primary phenolic antioxidant and a secondary oxidant that may include a sulfur-based antioxidant. Id. Abstract, Description of Embodiments. The primary phenolic antioxidant may have a semi-hindered or a less-hindered phenolic structure. Id. abstract. The ratio between the primary and secondary antioxidants may range from 9:1 to 1:9. Id. Description of Embodiments.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the insulating composition of ’704 to further comprise the secondary, sulfur-based antioxidant of Watabe at disclosed ratios motivated by the desire to create an insulating resin with excellent heat aging resistance, while suppressing deterioration in dielectric properties.
Claim 4 is rejected as the sulfur-based antioxidant may be dioctadecyl 3,3'-thiodipropionate and didodecyl 3,3'-thiodipropionate.
Claim 7 is rejected as the dielectric loss tangent in the case of application of a high frequency electric field having a frequency of ~10 GHz is less than 4.2 x 10-4. See ’704 Table 2. Furthermore, it is reasonable to presume that a dielectric dissipation factor of the insulating layer in the case of application of a high frequency electric field having a frequency of 10 GHz is 4.2 x 10-4 or less is inherent to the combined teachings of ’704 and Watabe. Support for said presumption is found in the use of like materials (i.e. an insulating layer comprising the claimed composition.) The burden is upon Applicant to prove otherwise. In re Fitzgerald 205 USPQ 594. In addition, the presently claimed property of would obviously have been present one the [reference] product is provided. Note In re Best, 195 USPQ at 433, footnote (CCPA 1977) as to the providing of this rejection made above under 35 USC 102. Reliance upon inherency is not improper even though rejection is based on Section 103 instead of Section 102. In re Skoner, 517 F.2d 947 (CCPA 1975).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D MATZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-5732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571.272.7783. 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.
/MATTHEW D MATZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786