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 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the hands and head formed separately (claim 4) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "101" and "103" have both been used to designate first crimping portion, Figs. 1 and 2 V Fig. 3.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murg et al. (10,601,206 “Murg”) in view of Boyajian (3,831,207).
PNG
media_image1.png
353
442
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Murg meets all of the limitations of claim 1, i.e., a wire cutting/stripping apparatus comprising a tool body;
wherein the tool body has two handles 112, 120 which are pivotally connected at the intersection 126 with a pivot axis 234, and each of the handles comprises a head portion 136 and 146 at the top thereof Fig. 3;
PNG
media_image2.png
199
518
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the head portion 136, 146 is perpendicular to the handle to form a T-shape Fig. 2;
PNG
media_image3.png
361
292
media_image3.png
Greyscale
the two head portions respectively have
a plurality of concaved arc-shaped stripping portions 160 with different sizes 1, which are formed symmetrically on the two head portions 136, 146 cutting the insulation without cutting the conductor 03:56-60;
except for the particulars of the accessories on the head, i.e., first and second crimping portions at the inner side of the junction of the head portion and the handle, and the first crimping portion and the second crimping portion are formed as a groove and a ridge so as to crimp cable wire; for each of the head portions 136, 146 having a serrated clamping portion at the inner side of the front end thereof for clamping cable wire; for the plurality of concaved arc-shaped stripping portions 160 to have different size, which are formed symmetrically on the two head portions 136, 146 between the clamping portion and the first crimping portion and between the clamping portion and the second crimping portion respectively.
PNG
media_image4.png
272
482
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Boyajian teaches a multipurpose pliers comprising wire stripping 40A, B for wires of different sizes Fig. 7, cutting 36A, 36B crimping 32, 34 and clamping tools 44A, 44B each adapted for a different function, wherein the arc-shaped stripping portions 40A, B are formed symmetrically on the two head portion 16A, B between the clamping portion 44A, B and the crimping portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the invention of Murg with different cutting accessories and arrangement as taught by Boyajian in adapting the wire cutting/stripping apparatus for different tasks.
The combination discloses a cutting portion defined by 36A, B disclose two blades instead of a blade and a block.
PNG
media_image5.png
405
403
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Courteny teaches a wire comprising cutters and strippers 9, 10, in which two cutters 9 and stripper 10 are aligned on each side of the centerline wherein the cutter 9 is provided with an anvil 8 to cleanly cut a workpiece (stripper and conductor) and the stripper 9 is provided with a sharp blade 11 which is aligned with the anvil 8 to prevent cutting through the conductor after stripping the insulation page 1, lines 55-80. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to further modify the invention of Murg and Boyajian with a cutter having an anvil/block aligned with the stripping portion as taught by Boyajian to provide an arrangement to cleanly cut a workpiece while preventing the stripper to cut through the conductor.
Regarding claim 2, PA (prior art, Murg modified by Boyajian) meets the limitations, i.e., the wire stripper of claim 1, wherein the first crimping portion 34 modified by Boyajian and the blade portion 11 modified by Courteny are formed on one head portion upper jaw while the second crimping portion 32 Boyajian and the block portion 8 Courteny are formed on the other head portion lower jaw Fig. 7 Boyajian, Figs. 3 and 4 Courteny. It is also noted that locations of parts are generally considered obvious modifications, depending on intended use, workpiece parameters, ease of access and/or comfort.
Regarding claim 3, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the wire stripper of claim 1, wherein the head portion 136, 146 and the handle 112. 120 are integrally formed Fig. 1 Murg.
Regarding claim 4, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the wire stripper of claim 1, except for the head portion and the handle to be formed separately.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art the effective date of the invention to form the parts separately for ease of maintenance and service, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
PNG
media_image6.png
286
305
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the wire stripper of claim 1, except for the total length of the head portion 136, 146 to be equal to the height from the bottom surface of the head portion to the center of the pivot axis. Although Fig. 2 of Murg partially shown here appears to show this feature, it is noted that size modifications are generally considered within routine experimentations. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the invention with regards to dimension or desired size, e.g., form the head smaller and equal to a length to the pivot pin for a more compact head and/or lighter tool in adapting the tool for a particular application, since such modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
PNG
media_image7.png
232
315
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
248
377
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Prior art made of record and not relied upon at this time, are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Esterkin and AAron are cited to show related inventions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HADI SHAKERI whose telephone number is (571)272-4495. The fax phone number for forwarding unofficial documents for discussion purposes only is (571) 273-4495. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F.
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, Brian Keller can be reached on 571 272 8548. The fax 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.
/Hadi Shakeri/
February 27, 2026 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723