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 .
Examiner’s Comments
The Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers, paragraphs, or figures in the references as applied to the claims for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
The Office has carefully considered Applicants remarks dated 10/28/25, which re made of record. Applicant’s arguments, filed on 10/28/25, with respect to claims 1-14 have been fully considered and are persuasive over the Harris reference.
Previously made art rejections with Harris as the primary reference have been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references currently set forth below.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPUB 20110083879A1 issued to Avula et al. in view of USPUB 20100212952A1 issued to Simoens et al.,
Regarding Claim 1, where Applicant seeks a wrappable textile sleeve for routing and protecting an elongate member, comprising: a textile layer having an inner surface and an opposite outer surface extending lengthwise between opposite ends and widthwise between opposite edges, said opposite edges being configured to be wrapped about a central longitudinal axis to bound a central cavity extending lengthwise along the central longitudinal axis between said opposite ends, said textile layer being formed of yarns interlaced with one another, wherein a least some of said yarns include metal wires; and a silicone-based layer disposed about said outer surface; Applicant is directed to the teachings of USPUB 20110083879A1 issued to Avula et al., who teach a flexible textile sleeve for routing and protecting elongate members such as wires or a wire harness and method of construction thereof is provided. The textile sleeve has an elongate textile wall constructed from interlaced yarn. An emulsion of acrylic binder and water-based silicon resin is applied to coat the interlaced yarn, with the acrylic binder providing resistance to end fray of the textile sleeve at temperatures below 150° C., and the silicone resin providing resistance to end fray between about 150-500° C. [abstract; ¶ 0007].
Avula et al., disclose that the flexible textile sleeve wall which includes interlacing one or more heat-formable yams to form a textile fabric [¶ 0008]. The textile wall can be constructed from multifilament and/or monofilament yarns, with at least one or more of the yarns in the self-wrapping embodiment being heat-settable. For example, one or more of the yarns can be provided as a heat-settable polymeric material, such as polyphenylene sulfide (PPS), for example, which can be heat-set at a temperature between about 200-225° C. The yarns forming the wall can be interlaced using a variety of interlacing processes, such as weaving (woven), knitting, or braiding, as desired, and shown schematically in FIG. 1 as being woven. [¶ 0015].
At ¶ 0007, 0013-0019, the instant reference teaches that upon forming the textile wall with the yarns which are interlaced by using braiding, knitting or weaving an emulsion is applied to the yarns creating a coating on the textile wall. The emulsion contains a silicone based resin.
Avula et al., teach that it is well known in the field that a silicone-based layer can improve the protective performance of textile sleeves for routing and protecting elongated members.
Avula et al. do not teach a least some of said yarns include metal wires.
This is remedied by the teachings of Simoens et al.
Simoens et al., are from the same art of endeavor as they too create electromagnetic interference (EMI) protection sheaths (sleeves) made from textiles. Their invention is aimed at a textile electromagnetic protection sheath, characterized in that the textile is formed of conductive filaments and non-conductive filaments.
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Avula et al., with the teachings of Simoens et al. One would have been motivated to do so to provide the extra EMI protection while still being relatively light weight and flexible as shown by Simoens et al. at ¶ 0076.
Regarding Claim 2, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 1, wherein at least some of said yarns are formed of multifilaments resistant to heat and/or monofilaments resistant to heat; Applicant is directed to ¶ 0015 of Avula et al., and ¶ 0055-0061 of Simoens et al.
Regarding Claim 3, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 2, wherein at least some of said yarns are formed of a polymeric material and/or a heat-settable polymeric material; Applicant is directed to ¶ 0015 of Avula et al., and ¶¶ 0055-0061 of Simoens et al.
Regarding Claim 4, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 2, wherein at least some of said multifilaments resistant to heat and/or monofilaments resistant to heat are provided as wires; Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0055-0061 of Simoens et al.
Regarding Claim 6, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 1, wherein said yams of said textile layer are braided; Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0015-0016 of Avula et al. and ¶¶ 0004, 0019, 0042 and 0052 of Simoens et al.
Regarding Claim 7, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 1, wherein said yams of said textile layer are woven; Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0015-0016 of Avula et al. and ¶¶ 0004, 0019, 0042 and 0052 of Simoens et al.
Regarding Claim 8, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 7, wherein said yams include warp yarns extending generally parallel to said central longitudinal axis and weft yarns extending generally transversely to said central longitudinal axis, said warp yarns being woven with said weft yarns; Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0018, and 0059-0060 of Simoens et al.
Regarding Claim 9, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 8, wherein at least some of said weft yams are heat-set to bias said wall to take-on a tubular configuration with said opposite edges being biased in overlapping relation with one another; Applicant is directed to ¶ 0030 and Figure 1 ref 10a and 10b of Simoens et al.
Regarding Claim 10, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 1, wherein said silicone-based layer penetrates through said textile layer, wherein said silicone-based layer extends radially inwardly from said inner surface of said textile layer; Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0007, 0013-0019 and figures 1, 2 of Avula et al. The coating can sit on the wall or impregnate the textile.
Regarding Claim 11, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 10, wherein said silicone-based layer is bonded to said textile layer; Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0007, 0013-0019 and figures 1, 2 of Avula et al. The coating can sit on the wall or impregnate the textile.
Regarding Claim 12, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 11, wherein said silicone-based layer is generally flush with one of said opposite edges and recessed from the other of said opposite edges; Applicant is directed to Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0007, 0013-0019 and figures 1, 2 of Avula et al.
Regarding Claim 13, where Applicant seeks that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 12, wherein said opposite edges are configured to be wrapped into overlapping relation with one another to bring opposite edges of said silicone-based layer into abutting relation with one another; Applicant is directed to ¶¶ 0007, 0013-0019 and figures 1, 2 of Avula et al.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPUB 20110083879A1 issued to Avula et al. in view of USPUB 20100212952A1 issued to Simoens et al. further in view of EP 3012930A1 issued to Manent et al.
The combination of Avula et al., and Simoens et al., is set forth above. However, neither reference discloses that the silicone-based layer is formed as a separate piece of material and afterward disposed about said textile layer, wherein said silicone-based layer is readily separable from said textile layer. This is remedied by the teachings of Manent et al., Manent et al., disclose an additional and separate silicone layer. A skilled artisan would have found it obvious to have used the silicone layer in Avula et al. modified by Simoens et al. One would have been motivated to do so as the separate piece of provides the extra protection from fire and at high temperatures, which has the effect of increasing thermal insulation and fire protection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. None of the cited reference teach that the wrappable textile sleeve of claim 4, wherein the entirety of said multifilaments resistant to heat and/or monofilaments resistant to heat are provided as wires.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Arti Singh-Pandey whose telephone number is (571)272-1483. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-5:00 and 8:00-10:00.
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, Melvin Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/Arti Singh-Pandey/
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1759
asp
Prosecution Insights