Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/714,465

LIQUID-COOLED CABLE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 29, 2024
Examiner
NGUYEN, CHAU N
Art Unit
2841
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Changchun Jetty Automotive Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
1031 granted / 1520 resolved
At TC average
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
70 currently pending
Career history
1590
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
50.7%
+10.7% vs TC avg
§102
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
§112
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1520 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 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. Claims 1-8 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eng (4310718) in view of Gao et al. (CN 201229802). Eng discloses a liquid-cooled cable, comprising a liquid cooling channel and at least one set of cable cores (7), wherein the liquid cooling channel comprises an internal liquid cooling channel (9), an external liquid cooling channel (10), and at least one set of connecting channels (holes in porous elements 5 & 6), the external liquid cooling channel communicates with the internal liquid cooling channel via the connecting channels, and a cooling medium (water, col. 2 line 22) flows in the liquid cooling channel; and the cable cores are disposed at an outer periphery of the internal liquid cooling channel and an inner periphery of the external liquid cooling channel, and the connecting channels are disposed at a radial direction of the liquid-cooled cable and separate the cable cores (re-claim 1). Eng does not disclose the cable cores (7) with a cross-section in a shape of fan (re-claim 1). Gao et al. discloses a liquid-cooled cable comprising a set of cable cores (1) with a cross-section in a shape of fan. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the cable cores (7) of Eng to have a fan-shape as taught by Gao et al. to meet the specific use of the resulting cable, such as the roundness of the cable core. Re-claim 2, Eng discloses the external liquid cooling channel comprising a first tube body and a second tube body, wherein the first tube body sleeves the second tube body, wherein the external channel further comprises at least one first support structure (1a), and wherein the first support structure is connected to an inner wall of the first tube body (5) and an outer wall of the second tube body. Re-claim 3, Eng discloses each of the connecting channels having a first via hole and a second via hole (holes in porous elements 5 & 6) at two ends, the first via hole running through a tube wall of the second tube body and the second via hole running through a tube wall of the internal channel. Re-claim 4, Eng discloses each first support structure (1a) being a plurality of sets of columnar structures. Re-claim 5, Eng discloses each connecting channel having two sets of side walls (side walls of element 6), wherein the side walls rotate (spiral) around a central axis of the internal channel (Fig. 2). Re-claim 7, Eng discloses the cable cores being disposed in the radial direction of the cooling cable. Re-claim 8, Eng discloses the cable further comprising an outer sheath layer (1) which is disposed at an outermost periphery of the cooling cable. Re-claim 12, Eng discloses a ratio of an inner cavity cross-sectional area of the internal channel to a cross-sectional area sum of the cable core being 2% TO 60% (col. 2 lines 35-40). Re-claim 13, Eng discloses a ratio of an inner cavity cross-sectional area of the external channel to a cross-sectional area sum of the cable core being 2% to 60% (col. 2 lines 35-40). Re-claims 14-15, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to choose suitable ratio of a distance between two side walls of the connecting channel to a circumference of the internal liquid cooling channel to be 5% to 45% and a ratio of a circumferential total width of the first support structure to a circumference of the external liquid cooling channel is 4% to 54% in the cooling cable of Eng to meet the specific use of the resulting cable 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. Claims 1, 2, 6, 9, 11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu (CN 109741871) in view of Gao et al. Zhu discloses a cooled cable, comprising a cooling channel and at least one set of cable cores (10), wherein the cooling channel comprises an internal cooling channel (3), an external cooling channel, and at least one set of connecting channels (5), the external cooling channel communicates with the internal cooling channel via the connecting channels, and a cooling medium (not numbered) flows in the cooling channel; and the cable cores are disposed at an outer periphery of the internal cooling channel and an inner periphery of the external cooling channel, and the connecting channels are disposed at a radial direction of the cooled cable and separate the cable cores (re-claim 1). Zhu does not disclose the cable cores (10) with a cross-section in a shape of fan (re-claim 1). Gao et al. discloses a liquid-cooled cable comprising a set of cable cores (5) with a cross-section in a shape of fan. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the cable cores (10) of Zhu to have a fan-shape as taught by Gao et al. to meet the specific use of the resulting cable, such as the roundness of the cable core. It is noted that since the modified cable of Zhu comprises structure and material as claimed, the cable of Zhu is a liquid-cooled cable; the external and internal channels are liquid-cooled channels (re-claim 1). Re-claim 2, Zhu discloses the external liquid cooling channel comprising a first tube body (2) and a second tube body (1), wherein the first tube body sleeves the second tube body, wherein the external channel further comprises at least one first support structure (4), and wherein the first support structure is connected to an inner wall of the first tube body (2) and an outer wall of the second tube body (1). Re-claim 6, Zhu discloses an outer periphery of at least one of the cable cores (10) being sleeved with an insulating layer (not numbered). Re-claim 9, Zhu discloses an outer periphery of the at least one cable core (10) being sleeved with an insulating layer, and an outer periphery of the insulating layer being sleeved with a shield structure (6). Re-claim 11, Zhu discloses the internal channel further comprising at least one set of second support structures which are a plurality of sets of columnar structures (8). Re-claim 16, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to choose a ratio of a circumferential total width of the second support structure to an inner diameter of the internal channel to be 3% to 20% in the cable of Zhu to meet the specific use of the resulting cable 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. Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eng in view of Gao et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Logakis et al. (2022/0144111). Claims 17-20 additionally recite a liquid cooling circulation pump communicating with the liquid cooling channel via a communication tube, wherein the liquid cooling circulation pump is configured to circulate and cool the cooling medium in the cooling channel. Logakis et al. discloses a liquid cooling cable comprising a liquid cooling circulation pump communicating with a liquid cooling channel via a communication tube, wherein the liquid cooling circulation pump is configured to circulate and cool the cooling medium in the cooling channel ([0050]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to provide/connect the liquid-cooled cable of Eng with a liquid cooling circulation pump, taught by Logakis et al., to circulate and cool the cooling medium in the cable. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 10 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAU N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1980. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 7am to 5:30pm. 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, Imani N Hayman can be reached at 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 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. /CHAU N NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 29, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12580099
Electrical cable that limits partial discharges
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573525
LEAD ALLOY BARRIER TAPE SPLICE FOR DOWNHOLE POWER CABLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567514
Low Sag Tree Wire
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12567517
LOW-SMOKE, FLAME-RETARDANT DATA COMMUNICATION CABLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12548691
CABLE CONNECTION COMPONENT AND CABLE STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+13.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1520 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month