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 § 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.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kogo (2022/0081541, Kogo ‘541) in view of Uegaki et al. (2018/0114610) and Kogo (2021/0065926, Kogo ‘926).
Kogo’541 discloses a communication cable, comprising: an insulation electric wire (10) including a conductor (11) having a cross-sectional area of 0.22 mm2 ([0052], diameter = 0.435 mm => A = 0.15 mm2 and [0058]) or less and a covering layer (12) covering the conductor and being formed of an insulating material; and a sheath (20) covering an outer periphery of the insulation electric wire and being formed of a resin composition, wherein the insulating material contains polypropylene ([0015], [0016]) and a flexible resin ([0019]), and a content rate of the polypropylene with respect to a total of the polypropylene and the flexible resin is 51 mass% or more and 85 mass% or less ([0018]), the insulating material contains 15 to 60 parts by mass of titanium oxide, 10 to 80 parts by mass of a bromine-based flame retardant, 0.5 to 10 parts by mass of antioxidant (Table 1, phenolic), 0.5 to 10 parts by mass of a copper inhibitor (Table 1, metallic soap which is known as copper inhibitor), and less than 40 parts by mass of magnesium hydroxide with respect to a total of 100 parts by mass of the polypropylene and the flexible resin (Table 1) (re-claim 1).
Kogo’541 does not disclose the conductor having tensile strength of 400 MPa or more; the resin composition of the sheath containing crystalline polyolefin and having the tensile elastic modulus of the sheath being 500 MPa or less; and the cable having characteristic impedance of 100 ±10 Ω (re-claim 1).
Uegaki et al. discloses a cable comprising a conductor (12) having a tensile strength of 400 MPa or more ([0032]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to use a conductor having a tensile strength of 400 MPa or more as taught by Uegaki et al. for the conductor of Kogo’541 to meet the specific use of the resulting cable.
Kogo’926 discloses a communication cable comprising a sheath (20) formed of a resin composition which contains crystalline polyolefin ([0038]); has a tensile elastic modulus of 500 MPa or less (abstract); contains the crystalline polyolefin and a thermoplastic elastomer, wherein a content rate of the crystalline polyolefin with respect to a total of the crystalline polyolefin and the thermoplastic elastomer is 55 mass% or more and 70 mass% or less ([0042]); contains 40 to 150 parts by mass of metal hydroxide and 10 to 30 parts by mass of a halogen-based flame retardant with respect to a total of 100 parts by mass of the crystalline polyolefin and the thermoplastic elastomer (Table 3); and which has a specific dielectric constant of 6 or less and a dielectric tangent of 5 x 10-2 or less ([0011] and [0013]); (re-claims 1-3). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to use the resin composition as taught by Kogo’926 for the sheath of Kogo’541 since such material has improved physical properties ([0038]).
Uegaki et al. discloses the cable having characteristic impedance of 100±10 Ω ([0031]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the cable of Kogo’541 to have characteristic impedance of 100 ±10 Ω as taught by Uegaki et al. to meet the specific use of the resulting cable.
It is noted that since the modified cable of Kogo’541 comprises structure and material as claimed, a mass increase rate of the sheath is less than 50 mass% in a plasticizer migration test involving exposure in an atmosphere at 105 °C for 3,000 hours.
Re-claim 4, Kogo’541 discloses the specific dielectric constant of the insulating material being 2.25 or greater and 3.5 or less ([0006]).
Re-claim 5, Uegaki et al. discloses the twisted pair (10) having a twist pitch of 15 times or more or 45 times or less of an outer diameter of the insulation electric wire ([0045]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the twisted pair of Kogo’541 to have the twist pitch taught by Uegaki et al. to meet the specific use of the resulting cable.
Re-claim 6, Kogo’541 discloses the thickness of the covering layer (12) being 0.32 mm or less (0053]).
Re-claim 7, Kogo’541 discloses a wire harness (Fig. 3) comprising the communication cable according to claim 1 and a PVC electric wire (110), wherein the communication cable and the PVC electric wire are bundled together.
Re-claim 8, Kogo’541 discloses the insulating material containing 37.5 parts by mass or less of magnesium hydroxide (Table 1) with respect to a total of 100 parts by mass of the polypropylene and the flexible resin.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAU N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1980. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 7am to 5:30pm.
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, Imani N Hayman can be reached at 571-270-5528. 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.
/CHAU N NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841