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 . 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.
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 1-12 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, the outer layers and exterior members are recited in an unclear and indefinite manner. The first outer layer installing process includes a step of “installing…the exterior member as one outer layer on a jig plate.” The claim goes on to recite a second outer layer installing process” which includes a step of “overlaying the exterior member as another outer layer.” It is unclear whether “the exterior member” in the second outer layer installing step is the same or different from the previously excited exterior member in the first outer layer installing process. Based upon the instant specification and figures, it appears that there are two separate exterior members on opposing sides of the inner layer/protection target. Applicant should clearly recite two separate exterior members rather than referring to each one as “the exterior member.” For example, the claim could recite a first exterior member and a second exterior member. Examiner notes that these issues persist in later claims as well and create further issues of indefiniteness. Updated numbering and language which clearly recites the various exterior members should be incorporated throughout the claims.
Claim 1 recites a second outer layer installing process which includes overlaying an exterior member on “the protection target part and the exterior member on which the protection target part has been placed.” There is no antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim since no placement step is previously recited. For examination purposes, the claim will be construed as reciting “overlaying an exterior member on “the protection target part and the exterior member on which the protection target part has been routed” for consistency with the previously recited steps.
Claim 1 recites “for each wire harness” in lines 13 and 29. This is unclear and confusing since a single wire harness is produced by the method. This phrase is repeated throughout the claims and remains unclear. Correction of this issue should include all dependent claims which recite the phrase “for each wire harness” in addition to claim 1. If multiple wiring harnesses are to be made in the claim, such harnesses and steps for their manufacture should be positively recited for clarity.
Claim 1 recites a method for manufacturing a wire harness, the method comprising combining first and second outer layers surrounding an inner layer to assemble a harness, and joining the first and second outer layers. This method forms a single wire harness. The claims goes on to recite “a mold release member installing process” which is performed “when a plurality of the wire harnesses are assembled.” Since a single wiring harness is formed and no step of assembling a plurality of wiring harnesses is recited, it appears that the claimed situation “when a plurality of the wire harnesses are assembled” does not occur. Therefore the claim has been construed such that the mold release member installing process is not performed and is not required to meet the claim.
Examiner notes that further claims are also rendered indefinite by reciting further steps which are conditional on the presence of the mold release member. Claim 2, for example, recites details of the joining process which are performed “when…the mold release member and the other wire harness different from the wire harness to be joined are present.” Since no additional wire harness is present in claim 1, it is unclear why limitations are included in the claim which occur only when an additional wire harness and mold release member are present. For examination purpose, all limitations directed to the assembling of multiple harnesses or which require the presence of an additional harness or mold release member are not considered to be required to meet the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the other wire harness different from the wire harness to be joined”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Since a single wire harness is made in the method of claim 1, this limitation is not considered to be part of the claim and is not addressed for patentability.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “the exterior layer as an inner layer” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This issue arises due to the unclear and indefinite manner in which the exterior members are described, as detailed above. Claims 6, 7, and 8 have the same recitation and are also unclear and indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gotou (US 2013/0292159).
Gotou teaches a method of manufacturing a wire harness (11), the method comprising: laying a second sheet material (29,75) on an operation bench, placing wires (13) on the second sheet material, and covering the wires with a first sheet material (27,73), wherein the first and second sheets materials are adhesively bonded to one another to form the wire harness (11) (See Figures; [0045]-[0050]; [0063]-[0065]; [0084]-[0087]). The step of laying the second sheet material on the operation bench reads on the instantly claimed first outer layer installing process of installing a first sheet-like exterior member on a jig plate. The step of placing wires on the second sheet material reads on the instantly claimed inner layer installing process of routing at least one protection target/electric wire to the first exterior member. The step of covering the wires with the first sheet material reads on the instantly claimed second outer layer installing process of overlaying a second sheet-like exterior member on the protection target. The adhesive bonding reads on the instantly claimed joining process in which first and second exterior members are joined together.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakajima (US 2017/0327060).
Nakajima teaches a method of making a wire harness (10), the method comprising: placing first-side nonwoven plates (21a,22a,23a) on a work table (T), placing a wire bundle (11) on the first-side nonwoven plates, placing second-side nonwoven plates (21b,22b,23b) on the wire bundle and first-side nonwoven plates, and bonding the first- and second-side nonwoven plates by welding (See Figures; [0029]-[0042]; [0053]-[0058]). The first-side nonwoven plates, work table, wire bundle, and second-side nonwoven plates read on the instantly claimed first outer layer, jig plate, protection target part, and second outer layer, respectively. The welding step reads on the instantly claimed joining process.
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.
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.
Claims 2-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakajima (US 2017/0327060).
Nakajima teaches a method of making a wire harness, as detailed above.
Regarding claims 2-4, Nakajima teaches welding the first- and second-side nonwoven plates (See [0018]; [0039]; [0042]).
While Nakajima does not expressly disclose ultrasonic welding with a horn and anvil (claim 2), resistance welding with paired electrodes (claim 3), or high-frequency welding (claim 4), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that the welding step generally disclosed by Nakajima would include such welding techniques. Examiner is taking official notice that ultrasonic welding, resistance welding, and high-frequency welding are commonly known welding techniques in the art which would have been obvious to use for the welding step of Nakajima.
Regarding claims 5-8, Nakajima teaches a single step of placing a wire bundle (11) on the first-side nonwoven plates and a single step of placing second-side nonwoven plates (21b,22b,23b) on the wire bundle and first-side nonwoven plates, as detailed above. Nakajima does not expressly disclose repeating these steps to provide additional layers as claimed. The repetition of known prior art steps does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art unless a new or unexpected result is achieved. In this case, repeating the placing steps provides a predictable result of creating additional layers of wires and nonwoven plates and therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing.
Regarding claims 9-12, Nakajima teaches that the work table includes support jigs (J1) in the form of support pins which serve as wiring guides (See Figures; [0045]-[0046]). Using the work table support jigs as wiring guides reads on the instantly claimed step of passing the protection target through a gap between two electric wire routing pins along a routing path for the protection target part on the jig plate. Nakajima also teaches that the first- and second-side nonwoven plates include through hole portions (21h,22h,23h) through which the support pins are inserted (See Figures; [0045]), which reads on the instantly claimed limitation “ at the first outer layer installing process and the second outer layer installing process, when the exterior member is installed in each of the first outer layer installing process and the second outer layer installing process, the electric wire routing pins are inserted into mesh through holes of the exterior member.”
Claims 9-12 also recite the limitation “the electric wire routing pins being thicker than the through holes.” While Nakajima does not expressly disclose this relationship, there are only three possible relationships between the size of the through hole portions and the support pin thickness in the method of Nakajima: equal size, pins larger than holes, and pins smaller than holes. Since there are only three possible relationships, each with a predictable result for how the plates would be supported on the work table, the selection of such a relationship would be a routine matter of design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art which does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARSON GROSS whose telephone number is (571)270-7657. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm Eastern.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at (571)270-5038. 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.
/CARSON GROSS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746