Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/440,183

ULTRAFINE COAXIAL CABLE

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Feb 13, 2024
Examiner
BURNS, TREMESHA WILLIS
Art Unit
2847
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Creganna Unlimited Company
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
673 granted / 867 resolved
+9.6% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
54 currently pending
Career history
887
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
47.2%
+7.2% vs TC avg
§102
49.9%
+9.9% vs TC avg
§112
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 867 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Response to Amendment Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 – 26 have been considered, but they are not persuasive. In the response to the Office Action dated October 23, 2025, Applicant primarily argues that “the cited art does not describe coating a center conductor directly to an exterior surface with a dielectric coating to form an insulator on the exterior surface surrounding and concentrically aligned with the center conductor.” Applicant further argues that the prior art, Buck, does not disclose that the hollow sheath 6 and/or the moisture barrier sheath 9 are a “coating” applied to the center conductor (see page 1 of Applicant’s remarks). It appears that Applicant’s definition and/or interpretation of a “coating” is being applied very narrowly. A “coating” is merely a layer of material applied to the surface of an object, and can be applied as a liquid, gas, or a solid (Wikipedia). Therefore, insulators 3 are applied to (or “coat”) the conductors 2 to form an insulator (see Buck, Figure 1). Please see the ground(s) of rejection below for a different interpretation of the prior art, Buck, in view of the amendments. Thus, Applicant’s traversal of the instant rejection on these grounds is deemed unsuccessful. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1 – 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Buck et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,750,930). Regarding claim 1, in Figure 1, Buck discloses a method of manufacturing a coaxial cable comprising: providing a center conductor (2) with an exterior surface; coating the center conductor directly to the exterior surface with a dielectric coating (3) to form an insulator (3; forms insulated wires 3) on the exterior surface surrounding and concentrically aligned with the center conductor; covering the insulator with a metallization layer (7) to form a cable shield (5) surrounding the insulator; and covering the cable shield with an outer jacket (8, 14); wherein the coaxial cable has a wire gauge of 54 AWG or smaller (col. 2, lines 15 – 19). Regarding claim 2, Buck discloses wherein the coating includes the steps of dip coating and curing the dielectric coating in multiple layers (Figure 1). Regarding claim 3, Buck discloses wherein the coating includes the step of foaming the dielectric coating such that the insulator has a microcellular structure with air pockets (Figure 1). Regarding claim 4, Buck discloses wherein the coating includes the steps of gelling the dielectric coating and drying the dielectric coating such that the insulator is an aerogel structure (Figure 1). Regarding claim 5, Buck discloses etching an outer surface of the insulator, the metallization layer being plated to the etched outer surface (Figure 1). Regarding claim 6, Buck discloses wherein the covering the insulator with the metallization layer includes electroless plating the metallization layer onto the insulator (Figure 1). Regarding claim 7, Buck discloses wherein the covering the insulator with the metallization layer includes electrolytic plating the metallization layer onto the insulator (Figure 1). Regarding claim 8, Buck discloses wherein the covering the insulator with the metallization layer includes vapor depositing of the metallization layer onto the insulator (Figure 1). Regarding claim 9, Buck discloses wherein the covering the cable shield with the outer jacket includes the steps of dip coating and curing a dielectric coating onto the metallization layer to form the cover (Figure 1). Regarding claim 10, Buck discloses wherein the dielectric coating is applied to the center conductor by a process other than extrusion (Figure 1). Regarding claim 11, in Figure 1, Buck discloses a coaxial cable comprising: a center conductor (2) having an exterior surface; a dielectric coating (3) applied directly to the exterior surface of the center conductor, the dielectric coating forming an insulator (3; forms insulated wires 3) on the exterior surface surrounding and concentrically aligned with the center conductor; a metallization layer (7) applied to the insulator, the metallization layer forming a cable shield (5) surrounding the insulator; and an outer jacket (8, 14) covering the cable shield; wherein the coaxial cable has a wire gauge of 54 AWG or smaller (col. 2, lines 15 – 19). Regarding claim 12, Buck discloses wherein the dielectric coating is one of a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) material or a polyethylene material (Figure 1). Regarding claim 13, Buck discloses wherein the dielectric coating is one of a polyimide foam material or a polyethylene foam material (Figure 1). Regarding claim 14, Buck discloses wherein the dielectric coating is a polymer-based aerogel (Figure 1). Regarding claim 15, Buck discloses wherein the dielectric coating includes a microcellular structure having air pockets (Figure 1). Regarding claim 16, Buck discloses wherein the outer jacket is dip coated and cured in one or more layers (Figure 1). Regarding claim 17, Buck discloses wherein the dielectric coating is dip coated and cured in one or more layers (Figure 1). Regarding claim 18, Buck discloses wherein the dielectric coating has an etched outer surface, the metallization layer applied to the etched outer surface (Figure 1). Regarding claim 19, Buck discloses wherein the metallization layer is one of an electroless plating layer or an electrolytic plating layer (Figure 1). Regarding claim 20, Buck discloses wherein the metallization layer is applied by vapor deposition (Figure 1). Regarding claim 21, Buck discloses wherein the dielectric coating has an outer diameter less than 0.002 inch (2.0 mil) (0.051 mm), the metallization layer has an outer diameter less than 0.0024 inch (2.4 mil) (0.0635 mm), and the outer jacket has an outer diameter less than 0.003 inch (3.0 mil) (0.076 mm) (Figure 1). Regarding claim 22, Buck discloses wherein the metallization layer has a thickness less than 20% of a total outer diameter of the coaxial cable and the outer jacket has a thickness less than 20% of the total coaxial cable (Figure 1). Regarding claim 23, in Figure 1, Buck discloses a medical device (col. 2, lines 14 – 20) comprising: an instrument performing an operation (col. 2, lines 14 – 20 and col. 1, lines 15 - 23); and an ultrafine coaxial cable (1) electrically connected to the instrument to transmit data between the instrument and an electrical device (col. 1, lines 15 - 23), the ultrafine coaxial cable including a center conductor (2), a dielectric coating (3) applied directly to an exterior surface of the center conductor forming an insulator (3; forms insulated wires 3) on the exterior surface surrounding and concentrically aligned with the center conductor, a metallization layer (7) applied to the insulator forming a cable shield (5) surrounding the insulator, and an outer jacket (8, 14) covering the cable shield, wherein the coaxial cable has a wire gauge of 54 AWG or smaller (col. 2, lines 15 – 19). Regarding claim 24, Buck discloses wherein the instrument is an ultrasound transducer, the ultrafine coaxial cable electrically coupled to the ultrasound transducer (Figure 1). Regarding claim 25, Buck discloses wherein the instrument is a camera, the ultrafine coaxial cable electrically coupled to the camera (Figure 1). Regarding claim 26, Buck discloses a catheter having a lumen, the ultrafine coaxial cable routed through the lumen of the catheter (Figure 1). Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is 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 TREMESHA W BURNS whose telephone number is (571)270-3391. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am - 4:30 pm 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, Timothy Thompson can be reached at (571) 272-2342. 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. TREMESHA W. BURNS Primary Examiner Art Unit 2847 /TREMESHA W BURNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 13, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Feb 18, 2026
Response Filed
May 29, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12683071
NOISE/VIBRATION REDUCTION DEVICE FOR TRANSFORMERS
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12676463
ADJUSTABLE-DEPTH RING ASSEMBLY
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12668374
DOUBLE-SHELL LIGHTNING PROTECTION CAP WITH IMPROVED ASSEMBLY
3y 0m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12672234
CONNECTING ARRANGEMENT
2y 10m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12666544
TEMPORARY PANEL RAILS
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+17.7%)
2y 6m (~1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 867 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month