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 statements (IDS) submitted on September 11th, 2024 and February 25th, 2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species I (Claims 1-10) in the reply filed on May 4th, 2026 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ball et al. (US7442884 B2).
Regarding Claim 1, Ball et al. expressly discloses a support device for a plurality of cables comprising:
a body (20) that extends a length along a central longitudinal axis between a first and second end (22/24), defining an outer surface (26) (Fig. 2A)
a slit (34) formed in the body that extends the length of the body
a plurality of inner ports formed in the body that extends the length of the body (30a-d)
each of the inner ports adapted to receive one of the plurality of cables (Col. 4-5, 64-67)
an inner passageway formed in the body that is connected to the slit, interconnects the plurality of inner ports, and extends the length of the body (Col. 5)
Ball et al. further discloses that the slit, plurality of inner ports, and the inner passageway segment the body into a first sidewall portion, a second sidewall portion connected to the first, and a core portion disposed between the two (Col. 5-6; Figs. 2A-C & 5). Ball et al. further discloses that the support device is secured within an associated housing that exerts a compressive force over the device (Figs. 2A-C; Col. 4, 37-44; Col. 6, 37-50).
Regarding Claim 2, Ball et al. expressly discloses that the plurality of inner ports and the inner passageway extend radially around the central longitudinal axis (Col. 5, 15-49)
Regarding Claim 3, Ball et al. expressly discloses that the width of the inner passageway is less than a diameter of each of the plurality of inner ports (Col. 5; Figs. 2-4)
Regarding Claim 4, Ball et al. expressly discloses that the materials of the body include elastomeric and polymeric materials (Col. 8, 42-67)
Regarding Claim 7, Ball et al. expressly discloses that the plurality of inner ports are equally spaced apart from each other (Col. 4-5, 64; Fig. 3; Claim 11)
Regarding Claim 8, Ball et al. expressly discloses that the core portion is solid (Col. 5., 15-33; Fig. 3)
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 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball et al. (US7442884 B2) in view of Vaccaro et al. (US11204109 B2).
Regarding Claim 5, Ball et al. expressly discloses a support device for a plurality of cables comprising:
a body (20) that extends a length along a central longitudinal axis between a first and second end (22/24), defining an outer surface (26) (Fig. 2A)
a slit (34) formed in the body that extends the length of the body
a plurality of inner ports formed in the body that extends the length of the body (30a-d)
each of the inner ports adapted to receive one of the plurality of cables (Col. 4-5, 64-67)
an inner passageway formed in the body that is connected to the slit, interconnects the plurality of inner ports, and extends the length of the body (Col. 5)
Ball et al. further discloses that the slit, plurality of inner ports, and the inner passageway segment the body into a first sidewall portion, a second sidewall portion connected to the first, and a core portion disposed between the two (Col. 5-6; Figs. 2A-C & 5). Ball et al. further discloses that the support device is secured within an associated housing that exerts a compressive force over the device (Figs. 2A-C; Col. 4, 37-44; Col. 6, 37-50). However, Ball et al. does not expressly disclose the support device includes a flexible hinge portion that connects the first sidewall portion and the second sidewall portion of the body. Vaccaro et al. teaches a flexible hinge portion that connects the first and second sidewall portions of the body (Col. 4, 65-67; Col. 5, 1-10; Figs. 1A-D). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate a flexible hinge portion in the body of Ball et al. as taught by Vaccaro et al., in order to facilitate repeated lateral snap-in loading of cables into the passages without requiring end-feeding and without permanently deforming the body.
Regarding Claim 6, Vaccaro et al. further teaches that the flexible hinge portion is located opposite the slit (Col. 3-4; Figs 1A-D).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball et al. (US7442884 B2) in view of Cox et al. (US7668431 B2).
Regarding Claim 9, Ball et al. expressly discloses a support device for a plurality of cables comprising:
a body (20) that extends a length along a central longitudinal axis between a first and second end (22/24), defining an outer surface (26) (Fig. 2A)
a slit (34) formed in the body that extends the length of the body
a plurality of inner ports formed in the body that extends the length of the body (30a-d)
each of the inner ports adapted to receive one of the plurality of cables (Col. 4-5, 64-67)
an inner passageway formed in the body that is connected to the slit, interconnects the plurality of inner ports, and extends the length of the body (Col. 5)
Ball et al. further discloses that the slit, plurality of inner ports, and the inner passageway segment the body into a first sidewall portion, a second sidewall portion connected to the first, and a core portion disposed between the two (Col. 5-6; Figs. 2A-C & 5). Ball et al. further discloses that the support device is secured within an associated housing that exerts a compressive force over the device (Figs. 2A-C; Col. 4, 37-44; Col. 6, 37-50). Ball et al. does not expressly teach first and second frustoconical portions at first and second ends of the body, adapted to help secure the body in the housing. Cox et al. expressly discloses a support device comprising a general frustoconical shape, adapted to help secure the body within the associated housing (Claims 3, 12; paragraph 0009). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate frustoconical end portions on the body of Ball et al. in order to facilitate insertion of the body into the associated housing opening and provide axial retention against pullout during service, adding frustoconical portions to the body of Ball et al. would have been a routine design choice with predictable results.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball et al. (US7442884 B2) in view of Bensel III et al. (US5155303 A).
Regarding Claim 10, Ball et al. expressly discloses a support device for a plurality of cables comprising:
a body (20) that extends a length along a central longitudinal axis between a first and second end (22/24), defining an outer surface (26) (Fig. 2A)
a slit (34) formed in the body that extends the length of the body
a plurality of inner ports formed in the body that extends the length of the body (30a-d)
each of the inner ports adapted to receive one of the plurality of cables (Col. 4-5, 64-67)
an inner passageway formed in the body that is connected to the slit, interconnects the plurality of inner ports, and extends the length of the body (Col. 5)
Ball et al. further discloses that the slit, plurality of inner ports, and the inner passageway segment the body into a first sidewall portion, a second sidewall portion connected to the first, and a core portion disposed between the two (Col. 5-6; Figs. 2A-C & 5). Ball et al. further discloses that the support device is secured within an associated housing that exerts a compressive force over the device (Figs. 2A-C; Col. 4, 37-44; Col. 6, 37-50). Ball et al. does not expressly teach one or more ridges formed in the outer surface of the body adapted to help secure the body in the housing. Bensel III et al., expressly discloses a support device wherein the outer surface of the body includes a plurality of ridges (74) that are adapted to help secure the body in the housing (Col. 5, 33-66; Figs. 2-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate outer surface ridges on the body of Ball et al., as taught by Bensel III et al., in order to improve the retention of the body within its associated housing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NASIM KAIRI COOPER whose telephone number is (571)272-9685. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00.
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 Hollweg can be reached at 5712701739. 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.
/NASIM KAIRI COOPER/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights