DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on October 2, 2025 has been entered.
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
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 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.
Claim(s) 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Negishi et al (JP Pat Num 6-52729, herein referred to as Negishi). Negishi discloses a wire device (Figs 1-6) for a speaker of a good noise quality in a wide band from a low noise to a high noise while matching with a speaker system, thereby preventing an increase in reduced quantity in a low band and reducing reflection loss so that a noise quality in the high noise if improved (abstract). Specifically, with respect to claim 21, Negishi discloses a wire device (10, Fig 1), comprising a high frequency conductor (18) having a high frequency conductor shaped portion (14) and configured to provide a high frequency resistance value (ie 9.52Ω/km, Paragraph 18) and a high frequency capacitance value (ie 75pF, Paragraph 18) so as to transmit signals at high frequency range (Pages 4 & 11, Paragraph 9 & 23, respectively), a low frequency conductor (16) having a low frequency conductor shaped portion (12) that is different from the high frequency conductor shaped portion (14) and configured to provide a low frequency resistance value (ie 5.2Ω/km, Paragraph 18) that is selectively less than the high frequency resistance value (ie 9.52 Ω/km) and a low frequency capacitance value (ie 45pF, Paragraph 18) that is selectively less than the high frequency capacitance value (ie 75pF), so as to transmit signals at a low frequency range that is lower than the high frequency range (Pages 4 & 11, Paragraph 9 & 23, respectively) and wherein the high frequency resistance value (ie 9.52Ω/km, Paragraph 18) is selectively configured relative to the low frequency resistance value (ie 5.2 Ω/km) and the high frequency capacitance value (ie 75pF, Paragraph 18) is selected configured relative to the a low frequency capacitance value (ie 45pF, Paragraph 18) so as to improve fidelity of the signals by reducing a differential between a high frequency signal propagation velocity of the high frequency conductor (18) relative to a low frequency signal propagation velocity of the low frequency conductor (16) to a sub-audible level (i.e. since the diameter of the low frequency conductor portion (12) is larger than the high frequency conductor portion (14) and the resistance and capacitive values are selected accordingly, the prior art structure is capable of performing the same functions as the claimed invention since all of the claimed structure is disclosed in the prior art reference). With respect to claim 22, Negishi discloses that the high frequency conductor shaped portion (14) comprises a first diameter portion (Fig 1), and wherein the low frequency conductor shaped portion (12) comprising a second diameter portion (Fig 1), that is larger than the first diameter portion (Fig 1).
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8, 11-12, 14, 16, and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrison (Pat Num 6,388,188) in view of Negishi (JP Pat Num 6-52729). Harrison discloses a bi wire audio system (Fig 14) comprising an audio cable having reduced self-inductance and attenuation, exhibits lower resistance, while improving noise rejection (Col 2, lines 64-67). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Harrison discloses a wire audio system (Fig 14) comprising a first cable (top cable attached to 51) which may comprise a first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2, as shown in Figs 9-10), that includes a first diameter (Figs 9-10), configured to provide a first cable resistance (ie .23Ω, see table 1) and a first cable capacitance value (ie 37.35 pF, see table 1) to be connected to a high frequency input (55) of a speaker (51, Col 14, lines 1-15) and a second cable (bottom cable attached to 53) having a second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a, as shown in Figs 9-10) that includes a second diameter (Figs 9-10), and configured to provide a second cable resistance (ie .23Ω, see table 1) and a second cable capacitance value (ie 30.87 pF, see table 1) for connection to a low frequency input (57) of the speaker (53, Col 14, lines 1-15), wherein the second diameter of each conductor (11a, 12a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) may be larger than the first diameter (Figs 9-10) of each conductor (11, 12) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2, Col 14, lines 23-26, i.e. low frequency circuit requires larger conductors than the high frequency circuit, so the second conductors will be larger), wherein the first cable resistance value (ie .23Ω, see table 1)is configured to be selectively the same as the second resistance value (ie .23Ω, see Table 1) and the first cable capacitance value (ie 37.35 pF, Table 1) is configured to be selectively larger than the second cable capacitance value (ie 30.87 pF, Table 1), 1). With respect to claim 2, Harrison discloses that the low frequency input (57) of the speaker (53) may including a frequency range between at least 0 hertz and 300 hertz (Col 3, lines 1-7) and the first cable (top cable attached to 51) and the second cable (bottom cable attached to 53) both having a similar propagation velocity of a signal at a frequency (see Table 2), wherein the frequency is within the frequency range of the low frequency input (see Table 2). With respect to claim 3, Harrison discloses the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) including a first insulated conductor (1) which may be disposed, in parallel (as shown in Fig 14, two top conductors are in parallel connected to 51) to a second insulated conductor (2) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) within the first cable (top cable connected to 51) and the first insulated conductor (1) and the second insulated conductor (2) are both individually insulated (via insulation 12, 22) and the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) including a first insulated conductor (1a) disposed, in parallel (as shown in Fig 14, two bottom conductors are in parallel connected to 53) to a second insulated conductor (2a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a), within the second cable (bottom cable connected to 53) and the first insulated conductor (1a) and the second insulated conductor (2a) both individually insulated (via insulation 12a, 22a). With respect to claim 4, Harrison discloses that the first cable (top cable connected to 51) may have a resistance value based on a resistance value of each insulated conductor (1, 2) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2), and the first cable (top cable connected to 51) may have a capacitance value (see Table 1); and the second cable (bottom cable connected to 53) having a resistance value based on a resistance value of each insulated conductor (1a, 1b) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 1b), and the second cable (bottom cable connected to 53) having a capacitance value (see Table 1), wherein the resistance value of each insulated conductor (1, 2) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) is larger than the resistance value of each insulated conductor (1a, 2a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a), wherein the capacitance value of the first cable (top cable connected to 51) is higher than the capacitance value of the second cable (bottom cable connected to 53, i.e. if the first cable has conductors for HF with smaller diameter than the second cable having larger conductors for LF, the larger conductors have less resistance and high capacitance than smaller conductors). With respect to claim 5, Harrison discloses that the first cable (top cable connected to 51, Fig 14) has a propagation velocity of a signal in the first cable (top cable connected to 51) at a first frequency within the high frequency input (see Table 2) and the second cable (bottom cable connected to 53) having a propagation velocity of a signal in the second cable (bottom cable connected to 53) at the first frequency within the high frequency input (see Table 2), wherein the propagation velocity of the signal in the first cable (top cable connected to 51) is less than the propagation velocity of the signal in the second cable (bottom cable connected to 53, i.e. larger gauge conductors have larger propagation velocity than smaller gauge conductors). With respect to claims 7-8, Harrison discloses that the first cable (top cable connected to 51) includes a first insulated conductor (1) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) of the first cable (top cable connected to 51) placed in parallel to a second insulated conductor (2) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) of the first cable (top cable connected to 51, Fig ), the first insulated conductor (1) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) configured to provide a signal having a first polarity (+), and the second insulated conductor (2) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) configured to provide a signal having a second polarity (-), and the second cable (bottom cable connected to 53), includes a first insulated conductor (1a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) placed in parallel to a second insulated conductor (2a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) and the first insulated conductor (1a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) configured to provide a signal having the first polarity (+), and the second insulated conductor (2a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) configured to provide a signal having the second polarity (-), wherein the first polarity (+) and the second polarity (-) are different (Fig 14). With respect to claim 9, Harrison discloses that the first cable (top cable connected to 51) includes a first pair of insulated conductors (1, 2) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) placed in parallel to a second pair of insulated conductors of the first plurality of insulated conductors; and the second cable, including: a first pair of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors placed in parallel to a second pair of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors; wherein both the first pair of insulated conductors of the first plurality of insulated conductors and the second pair of insulated conductors of the first plurality of insulated conductors are placed in parallel to both the first pair of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors and the second pair of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors. With respect to claim 11, Harrison discloses a system (Fig 14) comprising a first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2, as shown in Figs 9-10), wherein each conductor (11, 12) has a first diameter (Figs 9-10), configured to provide a first cable resistance (ie .23Ω, see table 1) and a first cable capacitance value (ie 37.35 pF, see table 1) to be connected to a high frequency input (55) of a speaker (51, Col 14, lines 1-15) and a second cable (bottom cable attached to 53) having a second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a, as shown in Figs 9-10) that includes a second diameter (Figs 9-10), and configured to provide a second cable resistance (ie .23Ω, see table 1) and a second cable capacitance value (ie 30.87 pF, see table 1) for connection to a low frequency input (57) of the speaker (53, Col 14, lines 1-15), wherein the second diameter of each conductor (11a, 12a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) may be larger than the first diameter (Figs 9-10) of each conductor (11, 12) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2, Col 14, lines 23-26, i.e. low frequency circuit requires larger conductors than the high frequency circuit, so the second conductors will be larger), wherein the first cable resistance value (ie .23Ω, see table 1)is configured to be selectively the same as the second resistance value (ie .23Ω, see Table 1) and the first cable capacitance value (ie 37.35 pF, Table 1) is configured to be selectively larger than the second cable capacitance value (ie 30.87 pF, Table 1), wherein the second diameter of each conductor (11a, 12a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) may be larger than the first diameter (Figs 9-10) of each conductor (11, 12) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2, Col 14, lines 23-26, i.e. low frequency circuit requires larger conductors than the high frequency circuit, so the second conductors will be larger). With respect to claim 12, Harrison discloses that the low frequency input (57) of the speaker (53) may including a frequency range between at least 0 hertz and 300 hertz (Col 3, lines 1-7) and the first plurality of conductors (1, 2) and the second plurality of conductors (1a, 2a) both having a similar propagation velocity of a signal at a frequency (see Table 2), wherein the frequency is within the frequency range of the low frequency input (see Table 2). With respect to claim 14, Harrison discloses that the first plurality of conductors (1, 2) has a propagation velocity of a signal in the first cable (top cable connected to 51) at a first frequency within the high frequency input (see Table 2) and the second plurality of conductors (1a, 2a) (bottom cable connected to 53) has a propagation velocity of a signal in the second cable (bottom cable connected to 53) at the first frequency within the high frequency input (see Table 2), wherein the propagation velocity of the signal in the first plurality of conductors (1, 2) is less than the propagation velocity of the signal in the second plurality of conductors (1a, 2a, i.e. larger gauge conductors have larger propagation velocity than smaller gauge conductors). With respect to claim 16, Harrison discloses that the first insulated conductor (1) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) of the first cable (top cable connected to 51) placed in parallel to a second insulated conductor (2) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) of the first cable (top cable connected to 51, Fig ), the first insulated conductor (1) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) configured to provide a signal having a first polarity (+), and the second insulated conductor (2) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (1, 2) configured to provide a signal having a second polarity (-), and the second cable (bottom cable connected to 53), includes a first insulated conductor (1a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) placed in parallel to a second insulated conductor (2a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) and the first insulated conductor (1a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) configured to provide a signal having the first polarity (+), and the second insulated conductor (2a) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (1a, 2a) configured to provide a signal having the second polarity (-), wherein the first polarity (+) and the second polarity (-) are different (Fig 14).
However, Harrison doesn’t necessarily disclose the second plurality of insulated conductors configured for connection to a low frequency input of the speaker; wherein the high frequency input of the speaker is configured to transmit signals at a high frequency range comprising greater than at least 800 hertz; wherein the low frequency input of the speaker is configured to transmit signals at a low frequency range comprising less than at least 300 hertz; wherein the second diameter of each insulated conductor of the second plurality of insulated conductors is structurally configured to be larger than the first diameter of each insulated conductor of the first plurality of insulated conductors, the first cable resistance value being configured to be selectively larger than the second cable resistance value, so as to introduce a delay in a linear increase in a propagation velocity of the first cable with the first cable operating in the high frequency range and wherein the delay of the linear increase in the propagation velocity of the first cable reduces a differential between (i) the propagation velocity of the first cable with the first cable operating in the high frequency range and (ii) a propagation velocity of the second cable with the second cable operating in the low frequency range such that a peak of the propagation velocity of the first cable within the high frequency range is lower than a peak of the propagation velocity of the second cable within the high frequency range (claims 1 & 11), nor the high frequency input of the speaker is configured to transmit signals at the high frequency range; the high frequency range includes one or more first frequencies between at least about 800 hertz and about 1 Megahertz; the low frequency input of the speaker is configured to transmit signals at a low frequency range; and the low frequency range includes one or more second frequencies between at least about 0 hertz and about 300 hertz (claim 23), nor the linear increase in the propagation velocity of the first cable is at greater than 10000 hertz, the linear increase defined according to percent propagation velocity change relative to frequency (claim 24), nor the first cable and the second cable are configured such that the differential is reduced to a sub-audible level (claim 25).
Negishi teaches a wire device (Figs 1-6) for a speaker of a good noise quality in a wide band from a low noise to a high noise while matching with a speaker system, thereby preventing an increase in reduced quantity in a low band and reducing reflection loss so that a noise quality in the high noise if improved (abstract). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Negishi discloses a bi-wire audio system (Fig 14) comprising a first cable (14) which may comprise a first plurality of insulated conductors (18, 18), that includes a first diameter (Fig 1), and configured to provide a first cable resistance value (ie 9.52Ω/km, Paragraph 18) and a first cable frequency capacitance value (ie 75pF, Paragraph 18) to be connected to a high frequency input (Figs 5-6) of a speaker (Fig 6) and a second cable (12) having a second plurality of insulated conductors (16, 16), that includes a second diameter (Fig 1), and configured to provide a second cable resistance value (ie 5.2Ω/km, Paragraph 18) that is selectively less than the first cable resistance value (ie 9.52 Ω/km) and a second cable capacitance value (ie 45pF, Paragraph 18) that is selectively less than the first cable capacitance value (ie 75pF) to be connected to a low frequency input (Figs 5-6) of a speaker (Fig 6), wherein the high frequency input of the speaker (SH) is configured to transmit signals at a high frequency range of between 800Hz-1MHz (i.e. 100KHz, Paragraph 10) and the low frequency input (SL) is configured to transmit signals at a low frequency of 0Hz-300KHz (i.e. 0.02-3KHz, Fig 3, on the graph), wherein the second diameter of each insulated conductor (16, 16) of the second plurality of insulated conductors (16, 16) is structurally configured to be larger than the first diameter (Fig 1) of each conductor (18, 18) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (18, 18), the first cable resistance value (ie 9.52Ω/km, Paragraph 18) is configured to be selectively larger than the second cable resistance value (ie 5.2 Ω/km, Paragraph 18) and the first cable capacitance value (75pF) is configured to be larger than the second cable capacitance value (45pF) so as to introduce a delay in a linear increase in the propagation velocity of the first cable (top cable attached to 51) with a first cable (top cable attached to 51) operating in the high frequency range (Figs 3-4), wherein the delay of the linear increase in the propagation velocity of the first cable (14) reduces a differential between (i) the propagation velocity of the first cable (14) with the first cable (14) operating in the high frequency range (i.e. 100KHz, Paragraph 10) and (ii) a propagation velocity of the second cable (12) with the second cable (12) operating in the low frequency range (i.e. 0.02-3KHz, Fig 3, on the graph) such that a peak of the propagation velocity of the first cable (14) within the high frequency range (i.e. 100KHz, Paragraph 10) is lower than a peak of the propagation velocity of the second cable (12) within the high frequency range (Paragraph 10, i.e. since the diameter of the low frequency conductor portion (12) is larger than the high frequency conductor portion (14), and the resistance and capacitive values are selected accordingly, the prior art structure is capable of performing the same functions as the claimed invention since all of the claimed structure is disclosed in the prior art reference). With respect to claim 11, Negishi discloses a system(10, Fig 1), comprising a first plurality of insulated conductors (18, 18), that includes a first diameter (Fig 1), and configured to provide a first conductor resistance value (ie 9.52Ω/km, Paragraph 18) and a first conductor frequency capacitance value (ie 75pF, Paragraph 18) to be connected to a high frequency input of a speaker (Fig 6) so as to transmit signals in a high frequency range ((i.e. 100KHz, Paragraph 10) and a second plurality of insulated conductors (16,16), that includes a second diameter (Fig 1), and configured to provide a second conductor resistance value (ie 5.2Ω/km, Paragraph 18) that is selectively less than the first conductor resistance value (ie 9.52 Ω/km) and a second conductor capacitance value (ie 45pF, Paragraph 18) that is selectively less than the first conductor capacitance value (ie 75pF) to be connected to a low frequency input (i.e. 0.02-3KHz, Fig 3, on the graph) of a speaker (Fig 6) so as to transmit signals at a low frequency range (i.e. 0.02-3KHz, Fig 3, on the graph) that is lower than the high frequency range (i.e. 100KHz, Paragraph 10) and the low frequency input (SL) is configured to transmit signals at a low frequency of 0Hz-300KHz (i.e. 0.02-3KHz, Fig 3, on the graph), wherein the first conductor diameter (18, 18) is structurally configured relative to the second conductor diameter (16, 16) such that the first conductor resistance value (ie 9.52Ω/km, Paragraph 18) is greater than the second conductor resistance value (ie 5.2 Ω/km, Paragraph 18) and the first conductor capacitance value (75pF) is configured to be larger than the second conductor capacitance value (45pF) so as to reduce, to a sub audible level, a differential between a propagation velocity of the first insulated conductors (18, 18) with the first cable (14) operating in the high frequency range (100kHz, Paragraph 10) and (ii) a propagation velocity of the second cable (12) with the second cable (12) operating in the low frequency range (i.e. since the diameter of the low frequency conductor portion (12) is larger than the high frequency conductor portion (14), and the resistance and capacitive values are selected accordingly, the prior art structure is capable of performing the same functions as the claimed invention since all of the claimed structure is disclosed in the prior art reference). With respect to claim 23, Negishi teaches that the high frequency input (located at 14) of the speaker (top speaker, Fig 5) is configured to transmit signals at a high frequency range of between 800Hz-1MHz (i.e. 100KHz, Paragraph 10) and the low frequency input (located at 12) is configured to transmit signals at a low frequency of 0Hz-300Hz (i.e. 2-3KHz, Paragraph 13). With respect to claim 24, Negishi teaches that the linear increase in the propagation velocity of the first cable is at greater than 10000 hertz, the linear increase defined according to percent propagation velocity change relative to frequency (i.e. since the diameter of the low frequency conductor portion (12) is larger than the high frequency conductor portion (14), and the resistance and capacitive values are selected accordingly, the prior art structure is capable of performing the same functions as the claimed invention since all of the claimed structure is disclosed in the prior art reference). With respect to claim 25, Negishi teaches that the first cable (12) and the second cable (14) are configured such that the differential is reduced to a sub-audible level (i.e. since the diameter of the low frequency conductor portion (12) is larger than the high frequency conductor portion (14), and the resistance and capacitive values are selected accordingly, the prior art structure is capable of performing the same functions as the claimed invention since all of the claimed structure is disclosed in the prior art reference).
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 bi-wire audio cable of Harrison to comprise the plurality of subsets configuration as taught by Negishi because Negishi teaches that such a configuration provides a wire device (Figs 1-6) for a speaker of a good noise quality in a wide band from a low noise to a high noise while matching with a speaker system, thereby preventing an increase in reduced quantity in a low band and reducing reflection loss so that a noise quality in the high noise if improved (abstract).
Claim(s) 6, 9-10, and 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrison (Pat Num 6,388,188) in view of Negishi (JP Pat Num 6-52729), as applied to claim 1 above (herein referred to as modified Harrison), further in view of Gareis (Pat Num 9,589,704). Modified Harrison discloses a bi wire audio system (Fig 14) comprising an audio cable having reduced self-inductance and attenuation, exhibits lower resistance, while improving noise rejection (Col 2, lines 64-67), as applied to claim 1 above.
However, modified Harrison doesn’t necessarily disclose the system comprising a third cable having a third plurality of insulated conductors, each conductor having the first diameter, configured for connection to the high frequency input of the speaker; and a fourth cable having a fourth plurality of insulated conductors, each conductor having the second diameter, configured for connection to the low frequency input of the speaker; the first cable and the third cable configured to be placed in parallel to one another; the second cable and the fourth cable configured to be placed in parallel to one another; and the first cable and the third cable configured to be placed in parallel to the second cable and the fourth cable (claims 6 & 15), nor the first cable includes a first pair of insulated conductors of the first plurality of insulated conductors placed in parallel to a second pair of insulated conductors of the first plurality of insulated conductors; and the second cable, including: a first pair of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors placed in parallel to a second pair of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors; wherein both the first pair of insulated conductors of the first plurality of insulated conductors and the second pair of insulated conductors of the first plurality of insulated conductors are placed in parallel to both the first pair of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors and the second pair of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors (claim 9), nor the first cable, including: a first set of insulated conductors of the first plurality of insulated conductors; the first set of insulated conductors of the first plurality of insulated conductors including a plurality of subsets of insulated conductors; and a first subset of the plurality of subsets of the first set of insulated conductors of the first plurality of insulated conductors including a first number of insulated conductors; and the second cable, including: a first set of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors; the first set of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors including a plurality of subsets of insulated conductors; and a first subset of the plurality of subsets of the first set of insulated conductors of the second plurality of insulated conductors including a second number of insulated conductors; wherein the first number of insulated conductors and the second number of insulated conductors are different (claim 10).
Gareis teaches an audio cable (Figs 2-3) for usage with a bi-wire audio system (Figs 1a-1b) having reduced resistance, inductance, and capacitance, while also avoiding skin effect losses at higher frequencies (Col 1, lines 54-67). Specifically, with respect to claims 6, 9-10, and 15, Gareis teaches the system (Figs 1-2D) comprising multiple cables (102) connected between an amplifier (100) and a speaker (104), wherein a multiple cables (208) including a plurality of sets of insulated conductors (204) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (202), wherein a first set of insulated conductors (200) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (202) including a plurality of subsets of insulated conductors (202a-c) and a first subset (202a) of the plurality of subsets (202a-c) of the first set of insulated conductors (200) of the first plurality of insulated conductors (204) including a first number of insulated conductors (200) wherein the first number of insulated conductors (202) may be are different (Fig 2D).
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 bi-wire audio cable of modified Harrison to comprise the plurality of subsets configuration as taught by Gareis because Gareis teaches that such a configuration provides an audio cable (Figs 2-3) for usage with a bi-wire audio system (Figs 1a-1b) having reduced resistance, inductance, and capacitance, while also avoiding skin effect losses at higher frequencies (Col 1, lines 54-67) and since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. (St. Regis Paper Co v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 2, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, the applicant argues the following
A) The Office Action erroneously maintains that Negishi teaches the claimed invention, of claims 1, 11, and 21 by improper interpreting “configured to” in claim 21 “as capable of”.
B) Harrison and Negishi, alone or in any combination, do not teach or suggest every element of claim 1 or claim 11.
With respect to arguments A & B, the examiner respectfully traverses. With respect to argument A, the examiner respectfully traverses. Firstly, it must be stated that the courts have been consistent that the manner of operating a structure device doesn’t differentiate the claimed structure for the prior art structure, if the prior art structure teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. Specifically, the MPEP teaches:
MANNER OF OPERATING THE DEVICE DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE
APPARATUS CLAIM FROM THE PRIOR ART
A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus
is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art
apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex
parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987) (The preamble of claim
1 recited that the apparatus was “for mixing flowing developer material” and the body of
the claim recited “means for mixing ..., said mixing means being stationary and completely
submerged in the developer material”. The claim was rejected over a reference which
taught all the structural limitations of the claim for the intended use of mixing flowing
developer. However, the mixer was only partially submerged in the developer material.
The Board held that the amount of submersion is immaterial to the structure of the mixer
and thus the claim was properly rejected.).
Secondly, the courts have also been consistent that functional language doesn’t differentiate the claimed invention from the prior art, if all of the structural limitations of the claimed invention are disclosed in the prior art references. Specifically, the MPEP teaches:
2114 [R-1] Apparatus and Article Claims — Functional Language
For a discussion of case law which provides guidance in interpreting the functional
portion of means-plus-function limitations see MPEP § 2181 - § 2186.
APPARATUS CLAIMS MUST BE STRUCTURALLY DISTINGUISHABLE
FROM THE PRIOR ART
>While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims<
directed to >an< apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure
rather than function. >In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429,
1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (The absence of a disclosure in a prior art reference relating to
function did not defeat the Board’s finding of anticipation of claimed apparatus because
the limitations at issue were found to be inherent in the prior art reference); see also In re
Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 228-29 (CCPA 1971);< In re
Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959). “[A]pparatus claims
cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch &
Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis
in original).
Based on the above guidelines, the examiner respectfully submits, that all of the structural limitations of the claimed invention are disclosed in the prior art reference and therefore must be capable of performing the same functions and be utilized in the same manner. If some different structure is responsible for performing the function of the claimed invention, then the applicant has to claim the different structure to differentiate the claimed invention from the prior art. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
However, in this case, Negishi discloses the resistance and capacitive values meeting the claim limitations in addition to the claimed structure (ie the conductors being larger in diameter). While Negishi is silent with respect to the propagation velocity, clearly such a characteristic of Negishi can be determined by a number of calculations. Specifically, in theory, electrical signals move at the speed of light. However, in reality, cable characteristics (material of conductor, insulaton, etc, thickness of insulation, diameter of conductor, etc, length of the cable, twist length of conductor pairs, etc) only slow down electrical signals. The ratio of actual speed of the electrical signals to the speed of light is known as the velocity factor or Velocity of Propagation (VOP), which is expressed as a percentage of the speed of light in free space. For certain insulation materials, such as polypropylene (PP) and semi-rigid PVC, VOP has already been calculated. For instance, PP has a dielectric constant of around 2.2-2.3 and PVC has a dielectric constant of around 3.36-3.70. Velocity Factor =1/[Symbol font/0x65], wherein [Symbol font/0x65] is the dielectric constant of the insulation material. Therefore, VF of PP is 1/ 2.25= 0.67, therefore 67%. The VF has to be adjusted for the length of the conductors and the twist factor of the twisted pairs. VOP = VF (3 X108 m/s ie speed of light)= 0.67 (3 X 108) =2.01 X 108 m/s =201,000 km/s.
However, the calculations of VOP can be calculated based on the information (gauges of conductors, insulation materials, resistance, capacitance, etc) given in the references of Harrison and Negishi, therefore structurally, meets the claimed language as claimed in claims 1-25.
Given the information, the examiner respectfully submits that the 35 USC 102(a)(1) and 103(a) rejections are proper and just.
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.
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
December 10, 2025