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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Claims 1-6 in the reply filed on 07/17/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the examiner does not explicitly explain why the cited references in the requirement disclose or suggest all of the common technical features. This is not found persuasive. Examiner does not provide an explanation because such explanation is already provided in two documents recorded in the file. First one is from PCT, filed on 09/10/2024 (4 pages) by the applicant. Second one is from JPO, filed on 09/29/2025 (6 pages) by the applicant. If examiner did not agree with such record, there would not be a restriction requirement.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rikihisa et al. (JP 2020-077499) in view of Sahashi et al. (WO 2019/177016).
Rikihisa et al. discloses an insulated electric wire comprising a conductor (2) comprising a plurality of elemental wires twisted together; and an insulation covering (3) that covers the conductor, wherein the insulated wire comprises a flat portion (20) and an inverse flat portion (30) along an axial direction of the insulated wire, wherein each of the elemental wires composing the conductor and the insulation covering are continuous between the flat portion and the inverse flat portion, wherein in the flat portion, the conductor has a flat shape that is long in a flat direction in a cross-section perpendicular to the axial direction, wherein in the inverse flat portion, the conductor has a flat shape that is long in an inverse flat direction different from the flat direction in a cross-section perpendicular to the axial direction, and wherein in each of the cross-sections of both the flat portion and the inverse flat portion, portions facing an outer periphery of the conductor, comprises a first outer-peripheral region located in the flat direction with respect to the axial direction, and a second outer-peripheral region located in a direction perpendicular to the flat direction with respect to the axial direction (re-claim 1).
Rikihisa et al. does not disclose the elemental wires in the first outer-peripheral region having deformation ratios deformed from a circular shape lower than those of the elemental wires in the second outer-peripheral region (re-claim 1).
Sahashi et al. discloses a conductor comprising a plurality of elemental wires (1) twisted together and having a flat portion (Fig. 3A), wherein the cross-section of the flat portion comprises: a first outer-peripheral region located in the flat direction with respect to the axial direction; and a second outer-peripheral region located in a direction perpendicular to the flat direction with respect to the axial direction, and wherein the elemental wires in the first outer-peripheral region have deformation ratios deformed from a circular shape lower than those of the elemental wires in the second outer-peripheral region and in the central portion, see annotated Figure above (re-claims 1 and 2).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the flat portion and the inverse flat portion in the conductor of Rikihisa et al. such that the elemental wires in the first outer-peripheral region have deformation ratios deformed from a circular shape lower than those of the elemental wires in the second outer-peripheral region and in the central portion to suppress the concentration of load on the outer strands and prevent the formation of uneven structures in the outer area, as taught by Sahashi et al. ([0011] of machine translation).
Re-claims 3-4, Rikihisa et al. also discloses that the flat direction and the inverse flat direction differ by 45°.
Re-claim 5, Rikihisa et al., as modified, discloses that in the cross-section of both the flat portion and the inverse flat portion, the elemental wires in the first outer-peripheral region have the deformation ratios deformed from a circular shape of 70% or lower of those in the elemental wires in the second outer-pheripheral region (see Sahashi, [0010]).
Re-claim 6, Rikihisa et al. discloses a wiring harness comprising the insulated wire as claimed in claim 1.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahashi et al. in view of Rikihisa et al.
Sahashi et al. discloses an insulated electric wire comprising a conductor (10A) comprising a plurality of elemental wires (1) twisted together; and an insulation covering (20) that covers the conductor, wherein the insulated wire comprises a flat portion (Fig. 3A), wherein the elemental wires and the insulation covering are continuous along the conductor, wherein in the flat portion, the conductor has a flat shape that is long in a flat direction in a cross-section perpendicular to the axial direction, wherein in the cross-section of the flat portion, portions facing an outer periphery of the conductor comprises a first outer-peripheral region located in the flat direction with respect to the axial direction, and a second outer-peripheral region located in a direction perpendicular to the flat direction with respect to the axial direction, and wherein the elemental wires in the first outer-peripheral region have deformation ratios deformed from a circular shape lower than those of the elemental wires in the second outer-peripheral region and in the central portion, see annotated Figure above (re-claims 1 and 2).
Sahashi et al. does not disclose the insulated wire comprising an inverse flat portion along an axial direction of the insulated wire, wherein in the inverse flat portion, the conductor has a flat shape that is long in an inverse flat direction different from the flat direction in a cross-section perpendicular to the axial direction (re-claim 1).
Rikihisa et al. discloses an insulated wire comprising a flat portion (20) and an inverse flat portion, wherein in the inverse flat portion, the conductor has a flat shape that is long in an inverse flat direction different from the flat direction in a cross-section perpendicular to the axial direction (re-claim 1). Rikihisa et al. also discloses that the flat direction and the inverse flat direction differ by 45° (re-claims 3 and 4).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the insulated wire of Sahashi et al. to comprises an inverse flat portion as taught by Rikihisa et al. to improve the flexibility of arrangement (Rikihisa, abstract).
Re-claim 5, Sahashi et al. discloses that in the cross-section of both the flat portion and the inverse flat portion, the elemental wires in the first outer-peripheral region have the deformation ratios deformed from a circular shape of 70% or lower of those in the elemental wires in the second outer-pheripheral region ([0010]).
Re-claim 6, Sahashi et al. discloses a wiring harness comprising the insulated wire as claimed in claim 1.
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
Prosecution Insights