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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 26 July 2023 and 29 April 2025 were filed prior to the mailing date of this office correspondence. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 11 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 6: “over the center conductor;” should read:
-- over the center conductor; and --
In claim 11, line 5: “conductor;” should read: -- conductor; and --
In claim 14, line 1: “The method of claim 1” should read:
-- The method of claim 11 --
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-3, 7, 11-13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogers (US 20210249158).
[AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (outer conductor layer)][AltContent: textbox (dielectric core layer)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
405
719
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1, Rogers.
Regarding claim 1, Rogers teaches, a cable (coaxial cable 100, Figs. 1 to 2C) comprising:
a center conductor (center conductor 110, Fig. 1);
a dielectric core layer (AES wool dielectric layer 108), the dielectric core layer including at least one layer formed of silicon dioxide fibers (AES wool may have alkaline earth minerals or glass fibers produced from a combination of silicon dioxide (SiO2), para. [0040]);
the silicon dioxide fibers being braided around and forming a braided dielectric core layer (ceramic fiber wrap inner jacket, para. [0083], the ceramic fiber wrap inner jacket is braided, claim 2, Rogers);
an outer conductor layer (outer conductor 106, Fig. 1) formed over the braided dielectric core layer.
Rogers does not teach the silicon dioxide fibers being braided around the center conductor. However, Rogers further teaches a braided ceramic fiber inner jacket comprising silicon dioxide fibers in para. [0083]. From the teaching of Rogers in para. [0083], “a coaxial cable having a center conductor surrounded by an alkaline earth silicate (AES) wool dielectric, which is surrounded by an outer conductor, which is surrounded by…a ceramic fiber wrap inner jacket”, from claim 2, “the ceramic fiber wrap inner jacket is braided”, and form para [0020] “ceramic fiber wrap inner jacket can include…an AES wool inner jacket”, one of ordinary skill in the art would have known that forming a braided AES wool dielectric layer 108 would improve the high temperature performance of a coaxial cable. Therefore, in view of the teachings of Rogers para. [0083], it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the coaxial cable 100 in Fig. 1 of Rogers and to replace the AES wool dielectric layer 108 in Fig. 1 with a silicon dioxide fiber braided dielectric layer as Rogers taught in para. [0083], so that it enables to improve the structural integrity and the high temperature performance of a coaxial cable.
Regarding claim 11, Rogers teaches, a method of forming a cable (coaxial cable 100, Figs. 1 to 2C and process 600, Figs. 6) comprising:
providing a center conductor (center conductor 110, see annotated Fig. 1 above);
at least one layer of silicon dioxide fibers around an outer surface of the center conductor for forming dielectric core layer over the center conductor (step 601, Fig. 6, AES wool dielectric layer 108, Fig. 1, AES wool may have alkaline earth minerals or glass fibers produced from a combination of silicon dioxide (SiO2), para. [0040], [0082]);
forming an outer conductor layer (step 602, Fig. 6, AES wool is encased with an outer conductor, para. [0082]) over the braided core layer to form the cable.
Rogers does not teach braiding the silicon dioxide fibers around the center conductor. However, Rogers further teaches a braided ceramic fiber inner jacket comprising silicon dioxide fibers in para. [0083]. From the teaching of Rogers in para. [0083] and claim 2, “a coaxial cable having a center conductor surrounded by an alkaline earth silicate (AES) wool dielectric, which is surrounded by an outer conductor, which is surrounded by…a ceramic fiber wrap inner jacket”, and “the ceramic fiber wrap inner jacket is braided”, one of ordinary skill in the art would have thought that forming a braided AES wool dielectric layer 108 would improve the high temperature performance of a coaxial cable. Please also refer to the rationale for combination regarding claim 1, as it is applicable to claim 11 in the same manner.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Rogers teaches the recited limitations with respect to claims 1 and 11. Rogers further teaches, further comprising a strength member layer (overwrap layer 104, see annotated Fig. 2A below, radially surrounding the outer conductor 106 is an overwrap layer 104, para. [0053]) formed over the outer conductor layer.
[AltContent: textbox (outer conductor layer)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (jacket layer)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (strength member layer)]
PNG
media_image2.png
441
783
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. AB, Rogers.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Rogers teaches the recited limitations with respect to claims 1 and 11. Rogers further teaches, further comprising a jacket layer (outer jacket 102, Fig. 2A, radially surrounding the overwrap layer 104 is an outer jacket 102, para. [0053]) formed over the strength member layer.
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Rogers teaches the recited limitations with respect to claims 1 and 11. Rogers further teaches, wherein the outer conductor layer formed over the braided core layer includes a conductive tape wrapped around the braided dielectric core layer (the outer conductor 106 may be a metallic wrap, para [0061], it is obvious that the metallic wrap is a tape).
Claim(s) 8-9 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogers as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Bufanda (US 20040118591).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, modified Rogers does not teach, the conductive tape includes at least one of a layer of copper and stainless steel. However, Bufanda teaches a cable including a center conductor 22 in Fig. 2, a dielectric core layer 24 and a bimetallic outer conductor 26 in which, the outer conductor 26 is at least one of a layer of copper and stainless steel (see annotated Fig. 2 below, outer conductor 26 is bimetallic, including an outer conductive layer 30 and an inner conductive layer 32. The inner conductive layer 32 is made of copper or copper alloy, while the outer conductive layer 30 may preferably be made of a less expensive metal such as stainless steel, para. [0016]).
[AltContent: textbox (stainless steel layer)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (copper layer)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image3.png
530
513
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2, Bufanda.
Therefore, in view of the teachings of Bufanda, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the coaxial cable 100 in Fig. 1 of Rogers and to replace the outer conductor 106 in Fig. 1 with a bimetallic outer conductor 26 as Bufanda taught in Fig. 2 so that it enables to reduce the skin effect and signal losses due to any surface abnormalities as Bufanda disclosed in para. [0005].
Regarding claims 9 and 19, modified Rogers does not teach the recited limitations. However, Bufanda further teaches, wherein the conductive tape has a copper layer on one side and a stainless steel layer on a side opposite the copper layer, the conductive tape wrapped around the braided dielectric core layer with the copper layer facing the center conductor (inner conductive layer 32 is made of copper or copper alloy, while the outer conductive layer 30 may preferably be made of a less expensive metal such as stainless steel, see annotated Fig. 2, para. [0016]). Please also refer to the rationale for combination regarding claims 8 and 18, as it is applicable to claims 9 and 19 in the same manner.
Claim(s) 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogers as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Kwon (KR 20150142141) and Mason (US 5302923).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, modified Rogers does not teach, a semi-rigid conductive tube, the center conductor and braided dielectric core layer being inserted inside the semi-rigid conductive tube. However, Kwon teaches a cable comprising a center conductor 11 in Figs. 6 and 7, a braided dielectric core layer 14 and an outer conductor 300, wherein the center conductor and braided dielectric core layer being inserted inside the semi-rigid conductive tube (in the step 140 of inserting the above-mentioned insulated core wire into the first metal pipe 300, para. [0084]). Therefore, in view of the teachings of Kwon, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the coaxial cable 100 in Fig. 1 of Rogers and to replace the outer conductor 106 in Fig. 1 of Rogers with metallic tube and to insert the center conductor and the braided dielectric core as taught in Fig. 6 of Kwon so that it enables to quickly form an insulated cable.
Modified Rogers does not teach a semi-rigid conductive tube. However, Mason teaches a coaxial cable including an outer semi-rigid metal tube concentrically surrounding an insulator concentrically surrounding a central coaxial conductor (Fig. 3, col 1, lines 25-30). Therefore, in view of the teachings of Mason, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the coaxial cable 100 in Fig. 1 of Rogers and to replace the outer conductor 106 in Fig. 1 of Rogers with a semi-rigid conductive tube as taught in Fig. 3 of Mason so that it enables forming cables with a desired flexibility.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 14 are 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. Claims 5-6 and 15-16 would be allowable by virtue of its dependency.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter:
Claims 4 and 14 would be allowable for disclosing a cable and a method of forming a cable, wherein the braided dielectric core layer includes a plurality of sublayers formed of silicon dioxide fibers, the sublayers being braided successively over the center conductor to form the braided dielectric core layer.
Though, prior art of record Rogers teaches a silicon dioxide braided dielectric core layer, Rogers fails to teach the braided dielectric core layer includes a plurality of sublayers formed of silicon dioxide fibers, the sublayers being braided successively over the center conductor to form the braided dielectric core layer.
Though, prior art of record Kwon teaches a silicon dioxide core layer including a braided dielectric layer, Kwon does not teach the braided dielectric core layer includes a plurality of sublayers formed of silicon dioxide fibers, the sublayers being braided successively over the center conductor to form the braided dielectric core layer.
Prior arts Bufanda or Mason does not teach a braided dielectric core layer.
Therefore, claims 4 and 14 would be allowable. Claims 5-6 and 15-16 would be allowable by virtue of its dependency.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Prior art Zhang (CN 101752031) teaches a cable comprising a center conductor, a braided dielectric core layer comprising silicon dioxide fibers and an outer conductor.
Prior art Sawada (US 5436409) teaches a cable including a center conductor, a dielectric core layer having braided silicon dioxide fiber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE K. ABRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1087. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:30 EST.
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, SUNIL K. SINGH can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/JOSE K ABRAHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3729