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 June 5, 2026. These drawings are approved.
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) 1-2, 4, 6-10, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robson (EP Pat Num 3140836B1) in view of Heggdal (Pub Num 2015/0014471). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Robson discloses that the assembly (Figs 3, 8, & 9) comprising a power supply (located at left 116) at a first location (left side), wherein the power supply (located at left 116) comprises P supply phase lines (left R, S, T), and wherein the power supply (located at left 116) is an AC power supply (Paragraph 22), a power-receiver (located at right 116) at a second location (right side), wherein the power receiver (located at right 116) comprises P receiving phase lines (right R, S, T), and a high-voltage offshore cable (110), arranged between the power supply (located at left 116) and the power receiver (located at right 116) to transmit electric power (Paragraph 26), wherein the first location (located at left 116) and/or the second location (located at right 116) may be an offshore location (Paragraph 1), and wherein the high-voltage offshore cable (110) comprises P x N power cores (R, S, T) X (3 sets (118, 118’, 118’’), wherein one or more elongated filler members (30) and one or more fluid pipes (32) are arranged radially within the core distribution circle (Fig 7, Paragraph 79), and wherein N = two or more (i.e. three), and wherein P = two or more (i.e. three), wherein N groups (118’, 118”, 118’”) of P power cores (R, S, T) connect to the respective P supply phase line (left R, S, T) of the power supply (located at left 116) and to the respective P receiving phase line (right R, S, T) of the power receiver (located at right 116), wherein each power core of the P x N power cores (R, S, T) X (118’, 118’’, 118’”) is distributed along the core distribution circle (Fig 7) in the cross-section of the high-voltage offshore cable (110, Fig 7) with mutual core angles (α) between the respective power cores (R, S, T) within one group (11) of power cores (R, S, T), and with mutual group angles (β) different from the mutual core angles (α) between succeeding groups (18, 18, 18, 18) of power cores (R, S, T), wherein the mutual core angles (α) and the mutual group angles (β) are defined with reference to a center of the high voltage offshore cable (110, Fig 1) and wherein the order of the P power cores (R, S, T) within each of the N groups (118’, 118’’, 118’”) is identical (Paragraph 78). With respect to claim 2, Robson discloses that the power cores (R, S, T) of the high-voltage offshore cable (110) may be wound in a helix configuration (Paragraph 29). With respect to claim 4, Robson discloses that the high-voltage offshore cable (110, Fig 7) further comprises a plurality of steel tubes (32), wherein the tubes (32) may be distributed along a tube distribution circle (Fig 7) that is arranged radially within the core distribution circle (Fig 7) n the cross-section of the high-voltage offshore cable (110). With respect to claim 7, Robson discloses that the high-voltage offshore cable (110) may further comprise a fiber optic monitoring cable (34) capable of monitoring of parameters of the high-voltage offshore cable (110) and is arranged radially outside of the core distribution circle (Fig 7, Paragraph 79). With respect to claim 8, Robson discloses that N is equal to three (i.e. 118’, 118’’, 118’”, Fig 7). With respect to claim 9, Robson discloses that the power supply (located at left 116) and/or the power receiver (located at right 116) comprises a termination assembly (Fig 8) located at a subsea location (Paragraph 1), wherein the termination assembly (Fig 8) comprises P x N power cores (R, S, T) X (3 sets (118, 118’, 118’’), wherein N = two or more (i.e. three), and wherein P = two or more (i.e. three).With respect to claim 12, Robson discloses that each power core (R, S, T) of each respective group (118’, 118”, 118’”) of the N groups (18, 18, 18) of power cores (R, S, T) carries a single phase of power (Paragraph 69). With respect to claim 13, Robson discloses that a first power core (R3) of a first group of power cores (R3, S3, T3) and a second power core (R2) of a second group of power cores (R2, S2, T2), wherein the first power core (R1) and the second power core (R2) are disposed on opposite sides of the core distribution circle (Fig 7) from each other and carry identical phase of power (Paragraph 71 & 78). With respect to claim 14, Robson discloses that the power supply (located at left 116) is a three phase supply (Paragraph 71), wherein P=3 (Fig 7).
While Robson disclose the cable (110) having steel tubes (32), Robson doesn’t necessarily disclose one or more elongated tensile strength members arranged radially within a core distribution circle and contributing to a tensile strength of the high voltage cable (claim 1), nor the tube one or more cooling tubes separate from one or more fluid pipes, wherein the cooling tubes are distributed along a cooling tube distribution circle that is arranged radially within the core distribution circle in the cross section of the high voltage offshore cable and wherein the one or more fluid pipes are arranged radially within the cooling tube distribution circle (claim 4), nor the number of cooling tubes arranged along the cooling tube distribution circle being P x N (claim 6), nor the high-voltage offshore cable comprising a vertically extending cable portion that extends between locations that are at least 30 meters vertically apart (claim 10).
Heggdal teaches an offshore high voltage electrical power transmission assembly (Paragraph 7, Figs 1-13) that transmits a large amount of electric power/energy (Paragraph 6) and facilitates the cooling of the electrical cables and their insulation materials (Paragraph 7) in order to prevent the cable from overheating (Paragraph 5). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Heggdal teaches that the assembly (Fig 4) comprising a high-voltage offshore cable (C2) to transmit electric power (Paragraph 41), wherein the high-voltage offshore cable (C2) comprises P power cores (10) distributed along a core distribution circle (Fig 4) in the cross-section of the high-voltage offshore cable (C2), wherein the cable (C2) may comprise one or more tensile members (8) arranged radially within a core distribution circle (Fig 4) and contribute to a tensile strength of the high voltage offshore cable (C2, i.e. steel) and cooling tubes (11), for cooling the cable (C2, C4, Paragraph 41). With respect to claim 4, Heggdal discloses a plurality of cooling tubes (22, Fig 6) separate from one or more fluid pipes (18, 19), wherein the one or more cooling tubes (6) are arranged along a cooling distribution circle (Fig 6) that is arranged radially around the core distribution circle (Fig 6) in the cross section of the cable (C2), and wherein the plurality of cooling pipes (18, 19) are arranged within the cooling distribution circle (Fig 6). With respect to claim 6, Heggdal discloses that the number of fluid pipes (18, 19) may be at least two (Paragraph 17). With respect to claim 10, Heggdal teaches that the cable (C2) comprises a vertically extending cable portion that extend between locations that are at least 30 meters vertically apart (i.e. 30-200m, Paragraph 13).
With respect to claims 1 & 10, 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 high voltage offshore cable of Robson to comprise the strength members, fluid pipes, and cooling tubes that extend between locations of at least 30 meters configuration as taught by Heggdal because Heggdal teaches that such a configuration provides an offshore high voltage electrical power transmission assembly (Paragraph 7, Figs 1-13) that transmits a large amount of electric power/energy (Paragraph 6) and facilitates the cooling of the electrical cables and their insulation materials (Paragraph 7) in order to prevent the cable from overheating (Paragraph 5).
With respect to claim 4, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art of cables at the time the invention was made to modify cable of Robson to comprise cooling tubes to be radially within the core distribution circle in the cross section of the cable, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70
With respect to claim 6, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made high voltage offshore cable of Robson comprise the fluid pipes to comprise the number P X N (i.e. at least two encompasses nine), as taught by Heggdal because Heggdal teaches that such a configuration provides an offshore high voltage electrical power transmission assembly (Paragraph 7, Figs 1-13) that transmits a large amount of electric power/energy (Paragraph 6) and facilitates the cooling of the electrical cables and their insulation materials (Paragraph 7) in order to prevent the cable from overheating (Paragraph 5) and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
While Robson also discloses that the N X P cable cores are terminated to a power supply and receiver to transmit power (Paragraph 22), Robson doesn’t necessarily illustrate the N x P connectors that connect to the respective power cores (claim 9).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the N X P cable cores of Robson to be connected to a set of N X P connectors, since it is well known in the art of cables that terminations of cable cores are made by utilizing connectors and since it is understood that Robson would have to have connectors in order to make the terminations needed to transmit power as required by the power cable of Robson.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, the applicant argues the following
A) Robson doesn’t disclose the cable comprising tensile strength elements and therefore cannot anticipate claim 1.
B) Since Robson discloses the power cables bundled as triads, it cannot disclose each being distributed along a core distribution circle and therefore cannot anticipate claim 1.
C) Robson doesn’t appear to disclose mutual core angles (α) between respective cores within one group of power cores and with mutual group angles (β) different from the mutual core angles (α) between succeeding groups of power cores, wherein the mutual group angles (β) and the mutual core angles (α) are defined with reference to a center of the high voltage offshore cable as recited in claim 1.
D) Robson and Heggdal, taken alone or in hypothetical combination , fails to teach or suggest all of the recitations of dependent claim 6.
With respect to argument A, the examiner respectfully submits this argument has been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection has been allowed with respect to claim 1.
With respect to arguments B & C, the examiner respectfully traverses. Firstly, the cable relied on in Robson discloses the following (see drawing below):
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow] Angle (β) Angle (α) Angle (β)
[AltContent: oval][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
514
582
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Angle (α) Angle (β) Angle (α)
As illustrated above, each power core (R, S, T) of the P x N is distributed along the core distribution circle in cross sectional of the cable (110). While not every power core is on the circle, the claim doesn’t state that it has to be on the circle, just distributed along the core distribution circle which is clearly shown above. Secondly, clearly every core (R, S, T) within the cable (118) is distributed with mutual core angles (α) within the core (ie between R & S and R &T) and a mutual group angle (β) between (S1 & T3, S3 & S2, and R2 & T1), which are larger than the mutal core angles (α), and both the core angles (α) and the group angles (β) are defined with respect to the center of the cable (110). Therefore, as illustrated above, Robson teaches these claimed limitations.
With respect to argument D, the examiner respectfully traverses. Clearly, Heggai as shown below in Figure 6, teaches the number of cooling tubes (6) arranged along the cooling tube tube distribution circle to meet P x N (ie are illustrated with 8), wherein the cooling tubes (6) are separate from the one or more fluid pipes (18, 19), wherein some of the fluid pipes (18, 19) are within the cooling tube distibution circle (as shown below with respect to 6). Therefore, Heggai clearly illustrates a cable comprising tensile strength elements (14, 15, 16), cooling tubes (6), and fluid pipes (18, 19) as detailed above and shown below.
[AltContent: oval]
PNG
media_image2.png
390
490
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In light of the above, the examiner respectfully submits that the 35 USC 103(a) rejection cited above is proper and just.
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.
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
August 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights