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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11-15, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wilson et al (20130167502).
In regards to Claim 1, Wilson teaches a composite wire (Figure 1C) comprising a thermoplastic (Paragraph 100) monofilament as a core component (Detail 2) and a sheath, the sheath comprises at least two groups (Details 23, 24) of reinforcement threads (Details 2ʹʹ, 2ʹʹʹ) wrapped around the core component, wherein the at least two groups of reinforcement threads form angles with the core component with the overall sum of all angles being substantially zero (illustrated as being twisted in opposite directions, at substantially opposite angles); and
wherein the core component comprises reinforcement fibers (Details 1), wherein the reinforcement fibers comprise carbon fibers, steel wire, aluminum wire, polyethylene terephthalate, polyethylene naphthalate, polyvinyl acetate, cellulose filaments, polyvinyl alcohol, polyvinyl acetate, polyamide-5, polyamide-6, polyamide-5,6, polyamide-5,10, polyamide-6,6, polyamide-4,10, polyamide-6,10, polyamide-6,8, polyamide-10 or polyamide-11, proteinous fibers, aromatic polyamides, polyphenylene benzobisoxazole, ultra high molecular weight polyethylene or aromatic polyesters or copolymers comprising monomers of said materials or mixtures of said materials (Paragraph 137, carbon fibers).
In regards to Claim 2, Wilson teaches the core component has a diameter of at least 0.3 and at most 1.2 mm (Paragraph 22).
In regards to Claim 5, Wilson teaches at least two groups of reinforcement threads are wound around the core component and/or at least two groups of reinforcement threads are wrapped around the core component (Figure 1C).
In regards to Claim 6, Wilson teaches the core component forms an angle of at least ± 15 degrees with every group of reinforcement threads (Figure 1C shows angles greater than ± 15 degrees).
In regards to Claim 8, Wilson teaches the core component comprises at least one fiber bundle, yarn, or cord (Paragraph 137, yarn).
In regards to Claim 9, Wilson teaches each of the reinforcement fibers in the core component comprise a monofilament (Paragraph 96).
In regards to Claim 11, Wilson teaches the materials comprised in the reinforcement fibers are in part or in total biological and/or recycled materials (there is no structural difference between virgin fibers, and fibers left over from a previous process which are recycled instead of being discarded; the claim is drawn to a product, not a method).
In regards to Claim 12, Wilson teaches the core component comprises polyethylene terephthalate, polytrimethylen terephthalate, polybutylene terephthalate, polyethylene naphthalate aromatic polyesters, aromatic polyamides comprising para-polyphenylene terephthalamide or meta polyphenylene isophthalamide, polyvinyl alcohol, polyvinyl acetate, polyphenylene benzobisoxazole, polyamide-5, polyamide-6, polyamide-6,6, polyamide-5,6, polyamide-4,10, polyamide-6,10, polyamide-6,8, polyamide-10 or polyamide-11, ultra high molecular weight polyethylene, polyurethane or polyetheretherketone, copolymers comprising monomers of said materials or mixtures of said materials (Paragraph 100, polyetheretherketone).
In regards to Claim 13, Wilson teaches the materials comprised in the core component are in part or in total biological and/or recycled materials (there is no structural difference between virgin fibers, and fibers left over from a previous process which are recycled instead of being discarded; the claim is drawn to a product, not a method).
In regards to Claim 14, Wilson teaches the reinforcement threads comprise glass, carbon fibers, steel wire, aluminum wire, polyethylene terephthalate, polyethylene naphthalate, polyvinyl acetate, cellulose filaments, polyvinyl alcohol, polyvinyl acetate, polyamide-5, polyamide-6, polyamide-5,6, polyamide-5,10, polyamide-6,6, polyamide-4,10, polyamide-6,10, polyamide-6,8, polyamide-10 or polyamide-11, proteinous fibers, aromatic polyamides, polyphenylene benzobisoxazole, ultra high molecular weight polyethylene or aromatic polyesters or copolymers comprising monomers of said materials or mixtures of said materials (Paragraph 137, carbon fibers).
In regards to Claim 15, Wilson teaches the materials comprised in the reinforcement threads are in part or in total biological and/or recycled materials (there is no structural difference between virgin fibers, and fibers left over from a previous process which are recycled instead of being discarded; the claim is drawn to a product, not a method).
In regards to Claim 22, Wilson teaches a thermoplastic string (Detail 2) comprising a thermoplastic monofilament (Detail 5) with embedded reinforcement fibers (Detail 1), wherein the thermoplastic string has a diameter of at least 0.6 mm (Paragraph 22).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson et al in view of Kato et al (20200140644).
In regards to Claim 3, while Wilson essentially teaches the invention as detailed above, including the inclusion of additives/fillers (Paragraph 69), it fails to specifically teach talc. Kato, however, teaches that the inclusion of talc is well known in the reinforced composite arts (Paragraph 52). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included talc as taught, as to as to improve the production of the final product. Nucleating agents such as talc are well known and their use well within the abilities of the ordinarily skilled artisan.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues:
“Figure 1C of Wilson shows three groups of wires wrapped around the core (details 2ʹ, 2ʹʹ, 2ʹʹʹ). The wrapping of detail 2ʹʹ is in opposite direction compared to the direction of details 2ʹ and 2ʹʹʹ. However, neither the figures nor in the description of Wilson disclose or suggest that their angles sum up to zero, as is recited in claim 1”.
First, only two groups of reinforcement threads are cited in the rejection, details 2ʹʹ and 2ʹʹʹ, not three groups. Second, the claim language states: “wherein the at least two groups of reinforcement threads form angles with the core component with the overall sum of all angles being substantially zero”. Examiner reads this to mean the first group of reinforcement threads (2ʹʹ) forms an angle, and the second group of reinforcement threads (2ʹʹʹ) forms an angle, and the sum of these angles is substantially zero. Figure 1C clearly shows the angle of Group 2ʹʹ is substantially the opposite of the angle of Group 2ʹʹʹ, making the sums substantially zero.
Applicant argues that Wilson relates to electric cables while the instant application is directed to reinforcement. Respectfully, these product claims are being examined based on claimed structure, which Wilson teaches. Examiner again reminds Applicant that every claim drawn to the claimed wire actually being physically placed in a position of reinforcement (Claims 16-21) is currently objected to as being allowable subject matter.
Applicant argues that Wilson requires the presence of thermosetting polymers. Applicant furthers this by stating: “The Office Action has taken an aspect about an optional sheath and incorrectly applied to the core component, which is a mischaracterization of the structure of the core”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Paragraph 26 states that: “…the core wire is selected from the group consisting of a thermoset polymer composite wire, a thermoplastic polymer composite wire, a metal matrix composite wire, or a ductile metal wire”.
Paragraph 100 recites the specific thermoplastic materials, and states “composite wire and/or the optional corrosion resistant sheath”.
As such, Examiner reads this to mean the core wire can be thermoplastic polymer, and the materials listed in Paragraph 100 do in fact apply to the core, as well as an optional corrosion resistant sheath which was never relied upon.
In regards to Claim 22, Applicant has argued that it is allowable “for reasons similar to claim 1”. Examiner addressed Claim 1 above.
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 Shaun R Hurley whose telephone number is (571)272-4986. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 8:00am - 3:00pm.
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, Clinton T Ostrup can be reached at (571) 272-5559. 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.
/SHAUN R HURLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights