Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/404,078

PARTING CABLE STRIPPER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 04, 2024
Examiner
HAY, GRANT DAVID
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 0% of cases
0%
Career Allow Rate
0 granted / 0 resolved
-70.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
5 currently pending
Career history
5
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
75.0%
+35.0% vs TC avg
§102
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 0 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tianbao CN-217182800-U in view of Bibi US 7210378 B1, Herbst et. al. (herein Herbst) US 2007/0221016 A1, and McLain US 2006/0236823 A1. PNG media_image1.png 928 733 media_image1.png Greyscale Tianbao Figure 1, annotated Regarding claim 1, Tianbao teaches: a parting cable stripper (Fig 1), comprising a clamp body (See Annotated Figure), a pressing part (10), a cutting part (See Annotated Figure), a stripping part (7), and a clamping part (See Annotated Figure), wherein the clamp body comprises: an upper clamp body (See Annotated Figure) and a lower clamp body (See Annotated Figure), wherein the pressing part (10), the cutting part (See Annotated Figure), the stripping part (7), and the clamping part (See Annotated Figure) are disposed on the clamp body (See Annotated Figure); and wherein the upper clamp body (See Annotated Figure) defines cable-twisting-winding holes (1). PNG media_image2.png 718 497 media_image2.png Greyscale Bibi Figure 1 Tianbao does not explicitly teach a spring as claimed. However, a related tool Bibi teaches a spring (39), where the spring (39) is disposed between the upper clamp body (24) and the lower clamp body (26) in order to ensure the wire stripping section is biased to an advantageous position when the tool is not in use (col 4, ln 43-44). One of reasonable skill in the art would have been able to modify the wire stripping device of Tianbao to incorporate the spring of Bibi to bias the upper clamp body and lower clamp bodies of Tianbao as advantageously taught in Bibi (col 4, ln 43-44). Furthermore, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions such that the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. PNG media_image3.png 365 381 media_image3.png Greyscale Herbst Figure 1 PNG media_image4.png 491 561 media_image4.png Greyscale Herbst Figure 2 The combination of Tianbao and Bibi further does not explicitly teach a hollow rivet around which the tool pivots. However, in a related tool Herbst does teach a hollow rivet part (16), where the hollow rivet (16) part configured to fix the upper clamp body (12) and the lower clamp body (14) is disposed on shaft-receiving parts of the upper clamp body (12) and the lower clamp body (14). The hollow rivet of Herbst advantageously reduces weight and aids in the buoyancy of the tool (Abstract, ln 9-11). One of reasonable skill in the art would have been able to modify the combination of Tianbao and Bibi to incorporate the hollow rivet of Herbst lighten the combination of Tianbao and Bibi as advantageously taught in Herbst (Abstract, ln 9-11). Furthermore, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions such that the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. PNG media_image5.png 257 469 media_image5.png Greyscale MacLain Figure 1 The combination of Tianbao, Bibi, and Herbst does not teach that the upper clamp body and the lower clamp body define hexagonal bolt holes individually. However, in a related tool MacLain does teach an upper clamp body (4) and a lower clamp body (6) that define hexagonal bolt holes individually (18 on the upper clamp body (4), 20 on the lower clamp body (6)) to advantageously reduce the number of tools a linesman needs to carry to work on fuses at the top of power poles (para 3-4 {“ Often the linesman will not know which wrench or wrenches will be necessary… requires the linesman to carry a complement of pliers and wrenches… beneficial to provide a single tool that can be used”}). One of reasonable skill in the art would have been able to modify the combination of Tianbao, Bibi, and Herbst to include the hexagonal bolt holes of MacLain to advantageously allow the user to carry a more functional tool at a lower weight than that of the individual component tools (para 3-4 {“ Often the linesman will not know which wrench or wrenches will be necessary… requires the linesman to carry a complement of pliers and wrenches… beneficial to provide a single tool that can be used”}). Furthermore, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions such that the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Tianbao, Bibi, Herbst, and MacLain teaches a closing-locking plate (9 of Tianbao), disposed on an overlapping part between the upper clamp body (See Annotated Figure of Tianbao) and the lower clamp body (See Annotated Figure of Tianbao). Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Tianbao, Bibi, Herbst, and MacLain teaches the hexagonal bolt holes ((18 on the upper clamp body (4), 20 on the lower clamp body (6) of MacLain) of each of the upper clamp body (4 of MacLain) and the lower clamp body (6 of MacLain) are different. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tianbao CN-217182800-U in view of Bibi US 7210378 B1, Herbst et. al. (herein Herbst) US 2007/0221016 A1, and McLain US 2006/0236823 A1, in further view of Zhang et. al. (herein Zhang) CN-114914853-A. Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Tianbao, Bibi, Herbst, and MacLain teaches the hollow rivet part comprises: two hollow rivets locked with each other (16 of Herbst); the two hollow rivets form a fixed shaft with a hollow structure (Reference Line A of Herbst), and the hollow rivet part is configured to fix the upper clamp body (12) and the lower clamp body (14) through the fixed shaft (Reference Line A of Herbst). The combination of Tianbao, Bibi, Herbst, and MacLain further teaches a cable-parting blade (2 of Tianbao). PNG media_image6.png 344 441 media_image6.png Greyscale Zhang Figure 1, annotated The combination of Tianbao, Bibi, Herbst, and MacLain does not teach the cable-parting blade as disposed on the hollow rivet. However, in a related tool Zhang teaches cable stripping blades disposed on a hollow structure (See Annotated Figure) to advantageously provide control when running wire through the blades (pg 3, ln 33 of Zhang Machine Translation). One of reasonable skill in the art would have been able to modify the combination of Tianbao, Bibi, Herbst, and MacLain to relocate the cable-parting blade (2 of Tianbao) into the hollow rivet (16 of Herbst) as taught by Zhang to advantageously increase the control of the cable-parting blade (pg 3, ln 33 of Zhang Machine Translation). Furthermore, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions such that the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In regards to hexagonal bolt wrenches on the handles of tools Chambers US 1631916 A and Boehnke US 2319633 A are made of record. In regards to multiple hexagonal bolt holes on a single tool handle Von Davis, et. al. US 2022/0297267 A1 is made of record. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRANT D HAY whose telephone number is (571)272-9510. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-3:30pm 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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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. /G.D.H./ Examiner, Art Unit 3723 /MONICA S CARTER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 04, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
Grant Probability
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 0 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month