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 § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 and 5 are finally 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) and Courteny (1,131,473).
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 V-shaped striping groove Figs. 3 or 5 including 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 and Courtney) 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 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.
PNG
media_image6.png
286
305
media_image6.png
Greyscale
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
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants arguments regarding the pending rejections are acknowledged, however they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, providing different arrangements of striping, cutting and clamping portions, are explicitly disclosed by the teaching reference Boyajian and versifying the tool for different tasks is clearly suggested by Boyajian. Similarly providing a clean cut by providing a block for the blades, i.e., as taught by Courteny is also explicitly disclosed and taught by said reference.
The further argument regarding the new feature, i.e., a V-shaped stripping groove is clearly shown by the base reference, Murg in figures 3 and 5, in which, similar to the instant application, one side of the stripping groove is flat while the other side coverages inwardly forming a V-shape.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, e.g., arc-shaped stripping portion with different sizes, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
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/
September 16, 2026 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights