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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species B, claims 1-12, 14-19 in the reply filed on 4/9/26 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claim 13 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species A, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/9/26.
An OA on the merits of claims 1-12, 14-19 as below:
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is in claim formats and should be updated to proper language. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 1-12, 14-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The term: “comprising” (claim 1, line 1) should be updated to: --the method comprising steps of:” --.
“, “(after each steps in claim 1, end of lines 2, line 6, 8, 10. 14) should be updated to: --“;” --.
Alphabetical such as “a); b); c); d); e); f)” should be deleted.
The phrase: “wherein step f)” (claims 5-6, 16-17) should be update to include “the expanding the mechanical support layer “limitation instead of merely referring to step f). for clarity of the method claims limitation.
It is unclear as to what being referring to as “it” (claim 5, line 2) please be more specific.
Claim 11 does not further limit the base claim 1 since no further method limitation existed in thereto because claim 11 is intended use purpose.
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) 1-12, 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uematsu (US 4472597) in view of Johanson (EP3786982) or Sizer et al (US 5191173).
Uematsu discloses the claimed method of manufacturing a power cable, comprising:
a) providing a conductor 1 (see Fig. 2),
b) providing an insulation system 4 comprising an inner semiconducting layer 2 arranged around the conductor, an insulation layer 3 arranged around the inner semiconducting layer 2, and an outer semiconducting layer 8 arranged around the insulation layer 3 (see Fig. 2)
c) providing an elastic mechanical support layer 6 around the outer semiconducting layer 8;
f) expanding the mechanical support layer 6 by releasing the compression element 8 from compressing the mechanical support layer, causing the mechanical support layer to support the metallic water blocking layer 7;
PNG
media_image1.png
364
487
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The Uematsu is in silent regarding steps of “d) compressing the mechanical support layer radially by means of a compression element , e) welding opposing edges of a metallic sheet arranged radially outside of the mechanical support layer longitudinally to form a metallic water blocking layer radially spaced apart from the mechanical support layer in the radially compressed state, and f) expanding the mechanical support layer by releasing the compression element (16) from compressing the mechanical support layer, causing the mechanical support layer to support the metallic water blocking layer”. Regarding to this, the Johanson discloses the above method technical features such as compressing the mechanical support layer radially by means of a compression element 4, e) welding opposing edges of a metallic sheet arranged radially outside of the mechanical support layer longitudinally to form a metallic water blocking layer radially spaced apart from the mechanical support layer in the radially compressed state (see discussed in col 7, lines 1-25) or the Sizer et al discloses the same as above (see Figs. 1-6, for the teaching of compressing the mechanical support layer radially by means of a compression element and process of welding opposing edges of a metallic sheet arranged radially outside of the mechanical support layer) . (see Sizer figs. 1-3 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
780
650
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to employ the Johanson or Sizer’s teachings as noted above onto the Uematsu for various known benefits including facilitate operation process by utilizing the known and available process at minimal cost.
The Uematsu further discloses regarding,
claim 2, regarding wherein the compression element 8 is a cord or tape wound radially outside the mechanical support layer 3 (see Fig. 2).
As applied to claims 2-4, regarding to the materials associated with the process recited in above claims. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the above well-known materials and its elements, since materials in these claims i/are selected based on design considerations and tradeoffs between cost, electrical properties, and/or dielectric properties.
As applied to claims 5-7, regarding heating to melt the compression material and the decomposition of the compression element is/are well known processes. Therefore, is/are not inventive features when depart from the teachings of the applied references above.
As applied to claims 8-9, refer to Fig. 2 of the Uematsu, reference 8 for teaching of method features cited in above claims.
As applied to claim 10, refer to Fig. 2 of the Uematsu, reference 7.
Limitation of claim 11 is also met by the combination reference above, since no additional method feature existed thereto.
As applied to claim 12, refer to Figs. 1-2 of the Uematsu.
As applied to claim 14 see Fig. 2, reference 7 of the Uematsu.
As applied to claim 15-19, refer to the same rationale discussion as mentioned in claims 5-9 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH N TRINH whose telephone number is (571)272-4569. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH ~5:00-3:30.
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.
/MINH N TRINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
4/28/26
Prosecution Insights