Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/556,659

METHOD FOR DISCRIMINANT MONITORING OF A COMPOSITE MULTI-MATERIAL ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Oct 20, 2023
Examiner
MAINI, RAHUL
Art Unit
2858
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Epsilon Composite
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
285 granted / 383 resolved
+6.4% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
9 currently pending
Career history
392
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.1%
-35.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.6%
+9.6% vs TC avg
§102
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
§112
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 383 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/20/2023 and 06/27/2025 are being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claims 3, 5-6 and 8-9 are objected to because of the following informalities: For Claim 3, “a second electrically insulating material” has antecedent basis in Claim 1. For Claims 5 and 6, “a second electrode” has antecedent basis in Claim 1. For Claims 5 and 6, “a current” has antecedent basis in Claim 1. For Claim 8, “a current” has antecedent basis in Claim 1. For Claim 9, “a current” has antecedent basis in Claim 1. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Regarding Claim 1, it is unclear how a threshold voltage can be applied and simultaneously a breakdown at a voltage lower than the threshold voltage can be observed. Regarding Claim 5, it is unclear how a step of "rotating said rotating device, for winding the tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element" be performed "prior to a step of winding onto a rotation device of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element thus, obtained." Claim 6 recites the limitation "said rotating device”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Regarding Claim 7, the use of terms such as “preferably”, “and better still” do not make it clear whether or not the external layer should be made of metal and stranded aluminum. Claims 2-4 and 8-9 are rejected as being dependent on Claim 1. 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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (CN 112557847 A, Pub March 26, 2021, herein Liu) in view of Foy et al. (US 2002/0050835 A1, Pub May 2, 2002, herein Foy). Liu teaches: A discriminant control method for a composite multi-material assembly comprising at least one internal layer made of a first, electrically conductive composite material (Cable core 42 - "internal layer", "first electrode" - is exposed [n0065]. It is a polypropylene cable composite and is thus a composite of polypropylene and other materials [n0065].; see Fig 1) and a second layer made of a second, electrically insulating composite material (Tested cable 4 is a polypropylene insulating power cable. It is a polypropylene cable composite and is thus a composite of polypropylene and other materials [0074].; see Fig 1), said second layer covering said first internal layer (The insulating portion 4 covers the cable core 42; see Fig 1), said method being characterized in that it comprises the following steps: - preparing said composite multi-material assembly by exposing a part of said internal layer, said part constituting a first electrode (Cable core 42 - "internal layer", "first electrode" - is exposed [n0080].; see Fig 1); - applying a second electrode (Copper shielding layer 41; see Fig 1) to the surface of the second layer (Tested cable 4 is a polypropylene insulating power cable [n0065].; see Fig 1), one of the first and second electrodes being earthed (Copper shielding layer 41 is grounded [n0083].; see Fig 1), - generating a current between the first and second electrodes by applying a threshold voltage (A voltage - "threshold voltage" - between layer 41 and core 42 - "generating a current between the first and second electrodes by applying a threshold voltage" [n0058].), Liu does not teach: discriminant monitoring by applying a threshold voltage pre-defined by calibration so as to be characteristic of a lack of structural defects, the appearance of a breakdown at a voltage lower than said threshold voltage being indicative of the presence of at least one structural defect in said composite assembly. However, Foy teaches: The Examiner is combining Liu in view of Foy by applying the below method step of Foy to the assembly and above method steps of Liu. applying a threshold voltage pre-defined by calibration so as to be characteristic of a lack of structural defects, the appearance of a breakdown at a voltage lower than said threshold voltage being indicative of the presence of at least one structural defect in said composite assembly (If the breakdown voltage - "appearance of a breakdown at a voltage" - is less than the predetermined value - "at a voltage lower than said threshold voltage" - it is concluded that the device has failed the electrical test - "indicative of the presence of at least one structural defect in said assembly" [0024].). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu in view of Foy by having discriminant monitoring by applying a threshold voltage pre-defined by calibration so as to be characteristic of a lack of structural defects, the appearance of a breakdown at a voltage lower than said threshold voltage being indicative of the presence of at least one structural defect in said composite assembly because it is applying a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of determining failure in a device. Claims 2-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Foy and further in view of Guery et al. (US 2008/0128155 A1, Pub Jun 5, 2008, herein Guery). Regarding Claim 2, Liu and Foy do not teach the limitations. However, Guery teaches: in the composite multi-material assembly (Figure 1 shows a cable made of composite [0032].; see Fig 1), the first electrically conductive material comprises carbon fibers (Core 1A is made of conductive material of carbon fiber [0032],[0049].; see Fig 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu and Foy in view of Guery by having in the composite multi-material assembly, the first electrically conductive material comprises carbon fibers because it is the use of a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of using carbon that has a high strength-to-weight ratio, low thermal expansion, and corrosion resistance. Regarding Claim 3, Liu and Foy do not teach the limitations. However, Guery teaches: in the composite multi-material assembly, a second electrically insulating material comprises glass fibers (Insulating material 2A is made of insulating material of glass fibers [0049],[0053].; see Fig 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu and Foy in view of Guery by having in the composite multi-material assembly, the first electrically conductive material comprises carbon fibers because it is the use of a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of using glass as an insulator because it prevents galvanic corrosion, provides electrical isolation, and enhances mechanical toughness. Regarding Claim 4, Liu and Foy do not teach the limitations. However, Guery teaches: in the composite multi-material assembly, the first electrically conductive material comprises carbon fibers (Core 1A is made of conductive material pf carbon fiber [0032],[0049].; see Fig 1) and a second electrically insulating material comprises glass fibers (Insulating material 2A is made of insulating material of glass fibers [0049],[0053].; see Fig 1), wherein said composite multi-material assembly comprises a tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element intended to be used in an overhead electric cable (The invention relates to an electrical power transmission conductor for a high voltage overhead line [0002].), said composite multi-material assembly being obtained by simultaneous steps of stacking and firing said internal layer and said second layer, said internal layer being obtained by pultrusion from a bundle of carbon fibers and a polymer matrix impregnating said carbon fibers and binding them together, and said second layer being obtained during the same pultrusion operation from a bundle of glass fibers and said polymer matrix impregnating said glass fibers and binding them together (Using a pultrusion method, the continuous fibers are impregnated with resin and then the resulting core is subjected to heat treatment by continuously raising its temperature [0033]. No subsequent heating is required for the insulating material [0050].). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu and Foy in view of Guery by having in the composite multi-material assembly, the first electrically conductive material comprises carbon fibers and a second electrically insulating material comprises glass fibers, wherein said composite multi-material assembly comprises a tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element intended to be used in an overhead electric cable, said composite multi-material assembly being obtained by simultaneous steps of stacking and firing said internal layer and said second layer, said internal layer being obtained by pultrusion from a bundle of carbon fibers and a polymer matrix impregnating said carbon fibers and binding them together, and said second layer being obtained during the same pultrusion operation from a bundle of glass fibers and said polymer matrix impregnating said glass fibers and binding them together because it is the use of a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of creating a composite cable with continuous, high-strength, lightweight, and corrosion-resistant profiles of virtually unlimited length, in an automated way. Regarding Claim 7, Liu teaches: said composite multi-material assembly comprises, in addition to said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element, at least one external layer at least partially covering said second layer, said external layer being made of an electricity-conducting material, preferably metal, and better still made of stranded aluminum [Copper sheathing material 41 is on the outside of the insulation layer which is on the outside of the cable core 42 [n0080].; see Fig 1]. Claims 5-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Foy and further in view of Guery and further in view of Mohamed et al. (FR 2,982,372, Pub May 10, 2013, herein Mohamed). Regarding Claim 5, Liu and Foy does not teach the limitations of the Claim. However, Guery teaches: the step of discriminant monitoring of said composite multi-material assembly is carried out on the production line of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element after the steps of stacking and firing said internal layer and said second layer of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element (see Rejection of Claim 4) and prior to a step of winding onto a rotation device of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element thus obtained, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu and Foy in view of Guery by having the step of discriminant monitoring of said composite multi-material assembly is carried out on the production line of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element after the steps of stacking and firing said internal layer and said second layer of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element and prior to a step of winding onto a rotation device of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element thus obtained because it is the use of a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of creating a composite cable with continuous, high-strength, lightweight, and corrosion-resistant profiles of virtually unlimited length, in an automated way. Liu, Foy and Guery do not teach: said method comprising the following steps: - preparing one of the ends of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element by securing to said rotation device, then exposing said internal layer at said end, said end constituting the first electrode which is earthed; - applying a second electrode to the surface of the second layer; - rotating said rotating device, for winding the tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element; - discriminant monitoring by generating a current between the first and second electrodes by applying the threshold voltage. However, Mohamed teaches: said method comprising the following steps: - preparing one of the ends of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element by securing to said rotation device, then exposing said internal layer at said end, said end constituting the first electrode which is earthed (Conductor 52 of Cable 32 is exposed and grounded [0010]. Cable 32 is wound around reel 38 [0013].; see Fig 2-3); - applying a second electrode to the surface of the second layer (Electrode 44 is applied to coating 54 [0013].); - rotating said rotating device, for winding the tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element (Cable 32 is wound around reel 38 [0013].); - discriminant monitoring by generating a current between the first and second electrodes by applying the threshold voltage (A voltage is applied between electrode 44, which is connected to coating 54, and conductor 52 [0018].). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu, Foy and Guery in view of Mohamed by having said method comprising the following steps: - preparing one of the ends of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element by securing to said rotation device, then exposing said internal layer at said end, said end constituting the first electrode which is earthed; - applying a second electrode to the surface of the second layer; - rotating said rotating device, for winding the tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element; - discriminant monitoring by generating a current between the first and second electrodes by applying the threshold voltage because it is the use of a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of allowing the testing of a long cable in a limited amount of space that allows for the reduction of the size of the high voltage safety zone as taught by Mohamed [0006]. Regarding Claim 6, Liu, Foy and Guery do not teach the limitations. However, Mohamed teaches: the discriminant monitoring step is carried out during the unwinding of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element wound onto said rotating device (Cable 32 is unwound from unwinding reel 36 [0020].), said method comprising the steps of: - preparing one of the ends of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element by securing to said rotation device, then exposing said internal layer at said end, said end constituting the first electrode which is earthed (Conductor 52 of Cable 32 is exposed and grounded [0010]. Cable 32 is wound around reel 38 [0013].; see Fig 2-3), - applying a second electrode to the surface of the second layer (Electrode 44 is applied to coating 54 [0013].); - unwinding the tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element (Cable 32 is unwound from unwinding reel 36 [0020].); - discriminant monitoring by generating a current between the first and second electrodes by applying the threshold voltage (A voltage is applied between electrode 44, which is connected to coating 54, and conductor 52 [0018].). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu, Foy and Guery in view of Mohamed by having the discriminant monitoring step is carried out during the unwinding of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element wound onto said rotating device, said method comprising the steps of: - preparing one of the ends of said tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element by securing to said rotation device, then exposing said internal layer at said end, said end constituting the first electrode which is earthed, - applying a second electrode to the surface of the second layer; - unwinding the tubular-shaped composite reinforcing element; - discriminant monitoring by generating a current between the first and second electrodes by applying the threshold voltage because it is the use of a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of allowing the testing of a long cable in a limited amount of space that allows for the reduction of the size of the high voltage safety zone as taught by Mohamed [0006]. Regarding Claim 8, Liu teaches: the discriminant monitoring step comprises the following steps: - preparing said composite multi-material assembly by exposing an end of said composite multi-material assembly (Cable core 42 - "internal layer", "first electrode" - is exposed [n0080].; see Fig 1), the external layer constituting the second electrode (Copper shielding layer 41 is the "second electrode" and the "external layer" [n0065].; see Fig 1); - discriminant monitoring by generating a current between the first and second electrodes by applying the threshold voltage (A voltage - "threshold voltage" - between layer 41 and core 42 - "generating a current between the first and second electrodes by applying a threshold voltage" [n0058].),. Liu, Foy and Guery do not teach: said end constituting the first electrode which is earthed However, Mohamed teaches: said end constituting the first electrode which is earthed (Conductor 52 of Cable 32 is exposed and grounded [0010].) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu, Foy and Guery in view of Mohamed by having said end constituting the first electrode which is earthed because it is effective for finding defects in a cable as taught by Mohamed [0014]. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Foy and further in view of Guery and further in view of Mohamed and further in view of Zhou et al. (CN 112578247 A, Pub Mar 30, 2021, herein Zhou). Liu, Foy, Guery and Mohamed do not teach the limitations. However, Zhou teaches: an additional step of electrical reflectometry detection, to detect and locate a defect in said composite multi-material assembly, this additional step of electrical reflectometry detection being carried out either after the discriminant monitoring step (TDR is required to determine the specific location of partial discharge in a cable after the PD Is determined [n0044-n0046].), or during said discriminant monitoring step by generating a current between the first and second electrodes by coupling the breakdown voltage technology to the electrical reflectometry technology. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu, Foy, Guery and Mohamed in view of Zhou by having an additional step of electrical reflectometry detection, to detect and locate a defect in said composite multi-material assembly, this additional step of electrical reflectometry detection being carried out either after the discriminant monitoring step, or during said discriminant monitoring step by generating a current between the first and second electrodes by coupling the breakdown voltage technology to the electrical reflectometry technology because it is the use of a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of saving time when there is no defect in the cable, and for locating the fault when there is a defect in the cable. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAHUL MAINI whose telephone number is (571)270-1099. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 9am-4pm, 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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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. /R.M/Examiner, Art Unit 2858 03/12/2026 /ALESA ALLGOOD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 20, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591003
INTEGRATED CIRCUIT TESTING SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584962
METHOD FOR DIAGNOSING FAILURE OF CURRENT BREAKING DEVICE AND ENERGY STORAGE APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571297
Data-Driven Constrained Model For Corrosion Inspection Tools
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571767
EDDY CURRENT SENSOR, POLISHING APPARATUS, AND FILM THICKNESS DETECTION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571768
EDDY CURRENT TESTING CIRCUIT, METHOD AND SYSTEM, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND TERMINAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

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
74%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+19.0%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 383 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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