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 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) 17, 19, 20-28, 30-33 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over, Wortberg (DE 102012200979; Applicant’s Own Admitted Prior Art (AOAPA)) in view of Sakata (JP 2004/268803).
In regard to claim 17, Wortberg (DE 102012200979; Applicant’s Own Admitted Prior Art (AOAPA)) teaches the conductor configuration for different operating potentials, the electrical supply line (supply line 10) is configured as a DC line (supply line used as a DC line, AOAPA, line 10) with one of said conductor configurations as a forward conductor (line element (1) formed as potential conductor and connected at an end with a positive connection of a vehicle energy storage (20) i.e. vehicle battery, abstract Wortberg) and another of said conductor configurations as a return conductor (Another line element (2) and a third line element (3) are formed as ground conductors, abstract), wherein each of said individual conductors of said conductor layer are electrically connected to each other (see electrical diagram in figure 1).
Wortberg does not teach the two conductor configurations are disposed in one conductor layer each and one above another, wherein each of said two conductor configurations has a plurality of individual conductors and said conductor configurations are guided in said cable duct, said cable duct has for each of said individual conductors an individual channel defined by said lateral separating ribs, and in that said individual conductors are disposed in a stationary manner relative to one another between two of said lateral separating ribs.
Sakata teaches an electrical supply line, comprising: a cable duct (11) having laterals separating ribs (11d); and two conductor configurations (upper and lower levels, figure 4c), wherein said two conductor (top levels and lower levels, figure 4c) configurations are disposed in one conductor layer (upper W1, W2, W3 & lower W4, W5, W6) each and one above another (figure 4c), wherein each of said two conductor configurations has a plurality of individual conductors (W1, W2, W3 & W4, W5, W6) and said conductor configurations are guided in said cable duct (11), said cable duct (11) has for each of said individual conductors (W1, W2, W3 & W4, W5, W6) an individual channel (partitions (12)) defined by said lateral separating ribs (11d), and in that said individual conductors are disposed in a stationary manner relative to one another between two of said lateral separating ribs (upper and lower partitions (12) and passage (S)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the invention to have included in the electrical supply line of Wortberg the two conductor configurations are disposed in one conductor layer each and one above another, wherein each of said two conductor configurations has a plurality of individual conductors and said conductor configurations are guided in said cable duct, said cable duct has for each of said individual conductors an individual channel defined by said lateral separating ribs, and in that said individual conductors are disposed in a stationary manner relative to one another between two of said lateral separating ribs as taught by Sakata since Sakata teaches a protector to improve the workability of assembling a wire harness in a vehicle assembly line (paragraph [0006]).
In regard to claim 19, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, wherein said individual conductors are clamped in their respective said individual channel (see the conductors in passages (S), figure 4c).
In regard to claim 20, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, wherein each said conductor layer (upper and lower layer) has exactly one of said conductor configurations for exactly one operating potential (see figure 4c).
In regard to claim 22, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, further comprising a common contact element (93, figure 1), wherein an electrically conductive connection between said individual conductors is established via an integrally bonded connection or via a mechanical connection of said individual conductors to said common contact element (93, figure 1).
In regard to claim 23, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, wherein said cable duct is a one-piece cable duct (11, figure 4c, one body).
In regard to claim 24, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, wherein said individual conductors (W1, W2, W3 & W4, W5, W6) are round conductors see figure 4c).
In regard to claim 25, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, wherein said individual conductors are compacted conductors or solid conductors (see figure 4c).
In regard to claim 26, Wortberg teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, wherein said individual conductors are bare conductors without insulation (there are no insulations on the conductors of Wortberg).
In regard to claim 27, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, wherein said individual conductors have different conductor cross sections (see figure 4c).
In regard to claim 28, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, wherein said individual conductors of a first of said conductor layers (upper layer) have a smaller conductor cross section than said individual conductors of a second of said conductor layers (lower layer)(figure 4c).
In regard to claim 30, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, wherein said individual conductors of a first of said conductor layers are disposed next to each other (see figure 4c), forming a gusset region, and said individual conductors of a second of said conductor layers are disposed in regions of said gusset regions (see figure 4c).
In regard to claim 31, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, wherein said cable duct (11) has an intermediate floor (12) which separates said two conductor configurations from one another (figure 4c), wherein said intermediate floor (12) is corrugated (figure 4c).
In regard to claim 32, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 17, further comprising fastening means (13d) disposed on said cable duct (11) for fastening to a carrier component (floor panel P).
In regard to claim 33, Wortberg in combination with Sakata teaches the electrical supply line according to claim 23, wherein said one-piece cable duct (11) is configured as an extruded profile (capable of being extruded).
In regard to claim 35, Wortberg (DE 102012200979; Applicant’s Own Admitted Prior Art (AOAPA)) teaches the conductor configuration for different operating potentials, the electrical supply line (supply line 10) is configured as a DC line (supply line used as a DC line, AOAPA, line 10) with one of said conductor configurations as a forward conductor (line element (1) formed as potential conductor and connected at an end with a positive connection of a vehicle energy storage (20) i.e. vehicle battery, abstract Wortberg) and another of said conductor configurations as a return conductor (Another line element (2) and a third line element (3) are formed as ground conductors, abstract), wherein each of said individual conductors of said conductor layer are electrically connected to each other (see electrical diagram in figure 1).
Wortberg does not a cable duct having laterals separating ribs; two conductor configurations, electrically isolated from one another, for different operating potentials, wherein said two conductor configurations are disposed in one conductor layer each and one above another, wherein each of said two conductor configurations has a plurality of individual conductors and said conductor configurations are guided in said cable duct, said cable duct has for each of said individual conductors an individual channel defined by said lateral separating ribs, and in that said individual conductors are disposed in a stationary manner relative to one another between two of said lateral separating ribs.
Sakata teaches an electrical supply line, comprising: a cable duct (11) having laterals separating ribs (11d); and two conductor configurations (upper and lower levels, figure 4c), wherein said two conductor (top levels and lower levels, figure 4c) configurations are disposed in one conductor layer (upper W1, W2, W3 & lower W4, W5, W6) each and one above another (figure 4c), wherein each of said two conductor configurations has a plurality of individual conductors (W1, W2, W3 & W4, W5, W6) and said conductor configurations are guided in said cable duct (11), said cable duct (11) has for each of said individual conductors (W1, W2, W3 & W4, W5, W6) an individual channel (partitions (12)) defined by said lateral separating ribs (11d), and in that said individual conductors are disposed in a stationary manner relative to one another between two of said lateral separating ribs (upper and lower partitions (12) and passage (S).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the invention to have included in the electrical supply line of Wortberg the two conductor configurations are disposed in one conductor layer each and one above another, wherein each of said two conductor configurations has a plurality of individual conductors and said conductor configurations are guided in said cable duct, said cable duct has for each of said individual conductors an individual channel defined by said lateral separating ribs, and in that said individual conductors are disposed in a stationary manner relative to one another between two of said lateral separating ribs as taught by Sakata since Sakata teaches a protector to improve the workability of assembling a wire harness in a vehicle assembly line (paragraph [0006]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18, 21, 29, 34 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 17 and 35 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attachment of the USPRO-892 form. 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 KRYSTAL ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9258. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-5 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, Timothy Dole can be reached on (571)-272-2229. 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.
/KRYSTAL ROBINSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2848
Prosecution Insights