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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al (KR2018-0037364A1, herein referred to as Jung) in view of Ryeczek (Pat Num 5,922,996). Jung discloses a busbar (Figs 1-17) that prevents an insulation made of heat shrinkable material from being damaged during the assemblage of a laminated conductor, which enables a very easy and quick assembly thereby resulting in mass production of the busbar (Paragraph 1). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Jung discloses a bus bar (Fig 16) comprising a bus bar main body (100) and an insulator (200) covering a part of the bus bar main body (100, Paragraph 36), wherein the insulator (200) has a hollow interior and being made of heat-shrinkable resin (Paragraph 40), wherein the bus bar main body (100) is inserted into the hollow interior (Paragraph 72-74). With respect to claim 2, Jung discloses that the bus bar main body (100) has through holes (111, 111) formed at both end sides (Fig 16) and in fixing a part of the insulator (200) to the bus bar main body (100), the insulator (200) is fixed to the bus bar main body (100) by heat-shrinking both end sides of the insulator (200, Paragraph 74) so as not to come in contact with the through holes (111, Paragraph 78).
However, Jung doesn’t necessarily disclose the insulator comprising an identification member being provided in the hollow interior and the identification member being operable to identify abnormal heat generation when the insulator is heat-shrunk due to the abnormal heat generation, wherein the identification member is configured so that when the insulator is heat shrunk due to the abnormal heat generation, a part of the insulator comes in close contact with the identification member, whereby the part of the insulator appears to be protruding (claim 1).
Ryeczek teaches an electrically cable assembly (Figs 1-17), which may be any insulated conducting medium that transmits, distributes, conducts, or retains electrical energy (Col 3, lines 19-36), such as a busbar, wherein the cable assembly will indicate through attention getting means the presence of an electrical fault and/or malfunction, and/or damage and/or hazard in the electrical cable assembly (Col 1, lines 45-57). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Ryeczek teaches an electrical cable assembly (Fig 15) comprising a conductor (142) and an insulator (144, 146, 148), wherein the insulator (144, 146, 148) may be made of a heat shrinkable material (148, may be made of heat shrinkable material, Col 4, lines 24-26 & 48-56 & Col 10, lines 52-60 as shown in Figs 8-9), wherein the insulator (144, 146, 148) comprises an identification member (146) provided in the hollow interior of the insulator (148), and wherein the cable assembly (Fig 15) is capable of being operable to identify abnormal heat generation when the insulator (144, 146, 148) is heat shrunk due to abnormal heat generation (i.e. variation in temperature, Col 5, lines 36-47 & Col 12, lines 1-17, Fig 15), wherein the identification member (68 & 70, as shown in Figs 5-7) are configured so that when the insulator (72) is heat shrunk due to abnormal heat generation, a part of the insulator (72) comes in close contact with the identification member (68 & 70) wherein part of the insulator (72) appears to be protruding (ie the space 76 is closed between 72 & 74 leaving two protrusions at 68 & 70, Col 9, lines 55-68).
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 busbar of Yung to comprise the insulator having an identification member configuration as taught by Ryeczek because Ryeczek teaches that such a configuration provides an electrically cable assembly (Figs 1-17), which may be any insulated conducting medium that transmits, distributes, conducts, or retains electrical energy (Col 3, lines 19-36), such as a busbar, wherein the cable assembly will indicate through attention getting means the presence of an electrical fault and/or malfunction, and/or damage and/or hazard in the electrical cable assembly (Col 1, lines 45-57).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 12, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, the applicant argues the following
A) No combination of the prior art of record discloses or suggests the claimed invention, as Jung doesn’t disclose an insulator comprising an identification member provided in the hollow interior and Ryeczek uses visually reacting material 146 which is covered by a transparent protective cover.
With respect to argument A, the examiner respectfully traverses. Ryeczek teaches various methods of determining and identifying various electrical faults including placing an identification portion (68 & 70) under the heat shrinking cover (72), wherein when the heat shrinking cover (72) shrinks due to overheating the space (76) between the inner jacket (74) and the outer jacket (72) is sealed removing the space (76) between the inner jacket (74) and the outer jacket (72), therefore leaving a projection at 68 & 78 along the two curve portions of the outer jacket (72, Col 9, lines 55-68). Ryecek also teaches that Figures 1-17 all may be combined and that any of the Figures may comprise features from other Figures. Therefore, Ryeczek indeed does teach the identification member as claimed in claim 1.
In light of the above, the examiner respectfully states that the 35 USC 103(a) rejection of claims 1-2 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
July 28, 2026
Prosecution Insights