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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
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 1 and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by, or alternatively, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over WO 2020/032000 to Takashima, with US Pub. No. 2021/0313095 cited as the English equivalent.
Regarding claims 1 and 5-8, Takashima teaches a composite body including an elongated adhesive body and a plurality of linear members being stuck around the adhesive body (Takashima, Abstract). Takashima teaches that the term “linear” is a concept that includes not only a straight line, a curved line and the like, but also a state where a material can be bent in various directions and angles like a yarn (Id., paragraph 0026). Takashima teaches that the plurality of linear members may include an electric wire, which is inherently conductive (Id., paragraph 0017, claim 8). Takashima does not appear to require the composite to be covered with an insulating material (see Id., Fig. 1). Takashima teaches that the linear members are spirally stuck around the adhesive body (Id., paragraph 0033).
Takashima teaches a substantially similar or identical structure as claimed, wherein the linear members may include an electric wire. Note that the properties of electric wires are well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, the composite appears to inherently be configured to provide electrical conductivity in a longitudinal direction and 360º in a circumferential direction as claimed.
Regarding claim 5, Takashima teaches that the adhesive body is preferably yarn-like, as the yarn-like adhesive body can deform following deformation of the composite body (Takashima, paragraph 0054, claim 5).
Regarding claim 6, Takashima teaches that the adhesive body includes a core material and an adhesive layer, wherein the adhesive layer may cover the entire surface of the core material (Takashima, paragraphs 0059-0062, claims 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 7, Takashima teaches that the adhesive body is preferably a pressure-sensitive adhesive body (Takashima, paragraph 0052, claim 7).
Regarding claim 8, Takashima teaches that the plurality of linear members may include an electric wire (Takashima, paragraph 0017, claim 8).
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 1 and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takashima in view of DE 3019151 to Lenards, as evidenced by the machine translation.
Regarding claims 1 and 5-8, Takashima appears to teach the claimed structure. However, in the event it is shown that the claimed invention requires “spirally attached” to comprise the structure such as shown in Fig. 2 in Applicants’ specification which is formed by twisting the body and member together, Lenards teaches an electrically-conducting yarn consisting of a core of a few continuous synthetic textile filaments and metallic wires, wherein the core contains rayon filaments, and the rayon and metallic wires are twisted together (Lenards, Abstract). Lenards teaches that the electrically conductive yarn is simple and cost-effective to produce, has a stretch and surface behavior comparable to conventional textile yarns, and has high electrical conductivity which is not significantly reduced even if surface cracks occur (Id., paragraph 0007). Lenards teaches that the rayon threads and copper wires are twisted together which prevents any displacement of the rayon threads relative to the copper wires (Id., paragraph 0012).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the composite body of Takashima, wherein the core material and linear members are twisted together, as taught by Lenards, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional composite body having a structure known in the art to predictably prevent displacement of the yarn-like adhesive body and linear members, such that the body has sufficient stretch and surface behavior. Based on the invention of the prior art combination and Applicants’ specification, such a structure would appear to be configured as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed November 5, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants argue that while Takashima describes that linear members may include an electric wire, this is merely one option among many different types. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Although Takashima teaches various materials as the linear members, Takashima teaches at paragraph 0017 and claim 8 that the linear member may include at least one of an optical fiber and an electric wire. Note that the properties of each are well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Applicants argue that Takashima does not describe an electrically conductive threadlike member that is specifically free from being covered with an insulating material. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Takashima does not require the composite body to be covered with an insulating material. Without such a requirement, one of ordinary skill would expect that the body is not covered with an insulating material.
Applicants argue that Takashima does not describe a composite that is configured to provide electrical conductivity as claimed, as the primary purpose is to bundle and organize linear members and not to provide multi-directional electrical conductivity. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As set forth above, Takashima teaches a substantially similar or identical structure as claimed. Therefore, it is reasonable for one of ordinary skill in the art to expect that the composite is configured as claimed.
Conclusion
Applicants’ amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicants are reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER Y CHOI whose telephone number is (571)272-6730. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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.
/PETER Y CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786