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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on December 23, 2025. These drawings are approved.
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, 3, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shi et al (WO Pat Num 2022/217432, herein referred to as Shi). Shi discloses a power supply cable (Figs 1-2) that removes large amounts of heat from the power conductors, thereby reducing the cable temperature during high power charging, while also ensuring safe and reliable use for users (Paragraph 43). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Shi discloses a power supply cable (left and right 3, Fig 2) comprising a heat pipe (left and right 4) including a container (left and right 4-2) and an insulating layer (left and right 4-1) disposed on an outer periphery of the container (left and right 4-2, Paragraph 74), wherein power lines (left and right 3-3) are disposed radially outside the heat pipe (left and right 4) and including conductive wires (3-3, Fig 2), wherein each of the power lines (left and right 3-3) has an arc shape cross section along an outer peripheral surface of the heat pipe (left and right 4, Paragraph 109). With respect to claim 3, Shi discloses that the heat pipe (left and right 4) has a line shape (Fig 2) and extends from a first end portion (left bottom portion of the cable) of the power supply cable (Fig 1) and a second end portion (right upper portion of cable) of the power supply cable (Fig 1). With respect to claim 4, Shi discloses that the power lines (left and right 3) further include a positive potential power line (left 3) and a negative potential power line (right 3, Paragraph 29).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2, 5, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi (WO Pat Num 2022/217432) in view of Sugihara et al (JP Pat Num 6-30672U, herein referred to as Sugihara). Shi discloses a power supply cable (Figs 1-2) that removes large amounts of heat from the power conductors, thereby reducing the cable temperature during high power charging, while also ensuring safe and reliable use for users (Paragraph 43), as disclosed with respect to claim 1 above. Specifically, with respect to claim 2, Shi discloses that the heat pipe (left and right 4) of the power supply cable (left and right 3) extends from a first end portion (left bottom portion of cable, Fig 1) to a second end portion (right top portion of the cable) of the power supply cable (Fig 1). With respect to claims 5-6, Shi discloses that the heat pipe (left and right 4) comprises a container (4-2).
However, Shi doesn’t necessarily disclose the heat pipe having a loop shape (claim 2), nor the container including a corrugated portion in which a protrusion portion protrudes radially outward and a recess portion recessed radially inward are alternately disposed along a longitudinal direction of the heat pipe (claim 5), nor an inner surface of the container in the corrugated portion having grooves, and the grooves extend spirally along the longitudinal direction of the heat pipe (claim 6), nor a condensation portion in which a working fluid is condensed in the heat pipe is disposed at a higher position in a vertical direction than an evaporation portion in which the working fluid is evaporated in the heat pipe (claim 8).
Sugihara teaches a heat pipe (Figs 1-3) capable of actively causing evaporation or boiling of a working fluid (Paragraph 4) by increasing the amount of heat transferred to the working fluid so that evaporation or boiling of the working fluid because active (Paragraph 6). Specifically, with respect to claim 2, Sugihara teaches that the heat pipe (1) may have a loop shape (Paragraph 7, Fig 2). With respect to claims 5-6, Sugihara teaches that the heat pipe (1) comprises a corrugated portion (20) in which protrusion portions (not numbered) protrude radially outward and a recess portion (21) recessed radially inward are alternately disposed along a longitudinal direction of the heat pipe (1). With respect to claim 8, Sugihara teaches that the heat pipe (1), wherein a condensation portion (11) in which a working fluid (i.e. freon or alcohol) is condensed in the heat pipe (1) and is disposed at a higher position in a vertical direction than an evaporation portion (10) in which the working fluid (i.e. freon or alcohol) is evaporated in the heat pipe (1, Paragraphs 7 & 13, Fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art of cables at the time the invention was made to modify the heat pipe of Shi to comprise the heat pipe configuration as taught by Sugihara because Sugihara teaches that such a configuration provides a heat pipe (Figs 1-3) capable of actively causing evaporation or boiling of a working fluid (Paragraph 4) by increasing the amount of heat transferred to the working fluid so that evaporation or boiling of the working fluid because active (Paragraph 6).
Claim(s) 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi (WO Pat Num 2022/217432). Shi discloses a power supply cable (Figs 1-2) that removes large amounts of heat from the power conductors, thereby reducing the cable temperature during high power charging, while also ensuring safe and reliable use for users (Paragraph 43), as disclosed with respect to claim 1 above.
However, Shi doesn’t necessarily disclose the heat pipe extending from an end portion of the power supply cable being flat (claim 7), nor the heat pipe having an inner diameter of the container in a liquid phase movement portion in which a working fluid in a liquid phase is moved is smaller than an inner diameter of the container in a gas phase movement portion in which a working fluid in a gas phase is moved (claim 9).
With respect to claims 7 and 9, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art of cables at the time the invention was made to the heat pipe extending from an end portion of the power supply cable to be flat, and the heat pipe having an inner diameter of the container in a liquid phase movement portion in which a working fluid in a liquid phase is moved being smaller than an inner diameter of the container in a gas phase movement portion in which a working fluid in a gas phase is moved, since it has been held that a change in form cannot sustain patentability where involved is only extended application of obvious attributes from a prior art. In re Span-Deck Inc. vs. Fab-Con Inc. (CA 8, 1982) 215 USPQ 835.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi (WO Pat Num 2022/217432) in view of Watanabe (JP Pat Num 2007/066994). Shi discloses a power supply cable (Figs 1-2) that removes large amounts of heat from the power conductors, thereby reducing the cable temperature during high power charging, while also ensuring safe and reliable use for users (Paragraph 43), as disclosed with respect to claim 1 above. Specifically, with respect to claim 10, Shi discloses a power supply cable (left and right 3, Fig 2) comprising a heat pipe (left and right 4) including a container (left and right 4-2) and an insulating layer (left and right 4-1) disposed on an outer periphery of the container (left and right 4-2, Paragraph 74), wherein power lines (left and right 3-3) are disposed radially outside the heat pipe (left and right 4) and including conductive wires (3-3, Fig 2), wherein each of the power lines (left and right 3-3) has an arc shape cross section along an outer peripheral surface of the heat pipe (left and right 4, Paragraph 109).
However, Shi doesn’t necessarily disclose a connector equipped power supply cable comprising a connector disposed in a first end portion of the power supply cable and configured to be connected to a power supply source, wherein the connector includes a connector terminal that contacts the heat pipe extending from the power supply cable (claim 10).
Watanable teaches a power supply cable (Figs 1-5) having improved heat dissipation efficiency (abstract). Specifically, with respect to claim 10, Watanabe teaches a connector-equipped power supply cable (Fig 2) comprising the a power supply cable (Fig 2) comprising a heat pipe (13, 14) including a container (13) and an insulating layer (14) disposed on an outer periphery of the container (13), wherein power lines (11, 12) are disposed radially outside the heat pipe (13, 14) and including conductive wires (11, Fig 2), and a connector (not shown) disposed in a first end portion (portion of the cable in the back of the automobile) of the power supply cable (Fig 1) and configured to be connected to a power supply source (Mb, Paragraph 13), wherein the connector (not shown) includes a connector terminal that contacts the heat pipe (13, 14) extending from the power supply cable (Fig 1, Paragraphs 14-15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art of cables at the time the invention was made to modify the heat pipe of Shi to comprise the power supply cable being connected to a connector configuration as taught by Watanable because Watanable teaches a power supply cable (Figs 1-5) having improved heat dissipation efficiency (abstract).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to the enclosed PTO-892 form for the citation of pertinent art in the present case, all of which disclose cables comprising various heat pipes.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM H MAYO III whose telephone number is (571)272-1978. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Thurs (5:30a-3:00p) Fri 5:30a-2p (w/alternating Fridays off).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Imani Hayman can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/William H. Mayo III/
William H. Mayo III
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2847
WHM III
February 20, 2026