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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “patten 6” and “a relief”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Regarding claims 10, and 16-18, the phrase “preferably” (claim 10, line 1 and claim 18, line 2), “can optionally be” (claim 16, line 4), and "for example" (claim 16, line 10) render the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-6, 8 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JPH0446604 to Seiichi et al.
Regarding claims 1 and 13, Seiichi et al disclose a method for producing a wire (copper wire), comprising at least the following steps: providing a wire precursor (casting); pressing depressions (by rollers) on the wire precursor; and annealing (see line 3 of Second paragraph on Page 5 of English translation attachment) the wire precursor provided with depressions (roughness) in order to obtain the wire; wherein the wire has a content of at least 95 wt.% of copper (copper wire), the content being based on the total weight of the wire (inherent since no other material is mentioned).
Regarding claims 2-6 and 8, Seiichi et al disclose the pressing is selected from the group consisting of punch marking, notching, embossing, stamping, channeling and grooving (embossing rollers, see lines 1-8 on page 4 of English translation) having height differences of the cylindrical surface (see Table 1); and having a range from 3 to 9 µm in a pattern (see Abstract) and the wire has a plurality of locations (upper/lower and side surfaces), wherein the depressions (roughness) are only introduced at a first location (upper/lower surfaces).
Regarding claim 14 and 15, Seiichi et al disclose a use of a roller comprising a relief (roughness) for producing a wire, wherein the relief having a height difference (D) in a range from 3 to 9 µm, wherein depressions are introduced by the roller at least one location of the wire (see Abstract).
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.
Claims 7 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seiichi et al.
Seiichi et al do not disclose all the limitations of claims 7 and 9-12. It would have been obvious matter of designed choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose any desired location on the wire to provide depression thereon such as at least one further location of the wire is smooth, wherein the at least one further location is located on the location of the wire facing away from the first point (claims 7 and 9); to choose any desired configuration of the wire such as a ribbon (claim 10); to choose the wire having any cross-sectional areas such as the one in claims 11 and 12, since Applicants have not disclosed the specific location of depressions and configuration of the wire, solve any stated problem or for any particular purposes and it appears the invention would perform equally well it the wire having depressions as disclosed by Seiichi et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art cited for their general teachings of producing a flat copper wire having roughness surface thereon.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONGHAI D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4566. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30.
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, Thomas J. Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/DN/ /DONGHAI D NGUYEN/February 7, 2026 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights