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 Objections
In line 4 of claim 1, “the connection terminals” lacks antecedent basis.
In line 5 of claim 1, “the electric connection skeleton” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-6, 14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Brenken EP 1701362.
1. Brenken discloses an electric energy transmission assembly (Fig 1 and 2), comprising at least one electric connection skeleton 2 and connectors (connection eyes 22) provided at two ends of the electric connection skeleton (see Fig 2), wherein the connector comprises a connecting terminal (connection eyes act as terminals), the two ends of the electric connection skeleton are electrically connected to the connecting terminals (ends of power cable 2 are electrically connected with 20), the electric connection skeleton comprises at least two different shapes of cross sections (Fig 2 flat cable section 22 and funnel-shaped transition piece 33), the electric connection skeleton is sleeved with an insulating layer (insulating sheath 2b and insulating layer 3, see Fig 2 and bottom of page 3, claims section), and the insulating layer covers an outside of the electric connection skeleton (layer 2b and 3 covers outside of power cable 2).
4. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1, and further teaches a cross section of the electric connection skeleton is in one or more selected from a circular shape, an oval shape, a rectangular shape, a polygonal shape, A shape, a B shape, a D shape, an M shape, an N shape, an O shape, an S shape, a P shape, an E shape, an F shape, an H shape, a K shape, an L shape, a T shape, a U shape, a V shape, a W shape, an X shape, a Y shape, a Z shape, a semi-arc shape, an arc shape, and a wavy shape (abstract, power cable 2 is circular in cross section).
5. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1, wherein the electric energy transmission assembly 2 further comprises a transition connection section that transitionally connects two different shapes of cross sections of each electric connection skeleton (see Fig 2 and second half of page 3 which discusses transition points from round cables 21, 21a to flat cables 22).
6. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 5, wherein the electric connection skeleton 2 comprises at least one bent portion (multiple bent portions shown in Fig 2), and the transition connection section is located in the bent portion (at least one transition occurs at a bend, see transition of 21 to 33, 22 to 33, and 33 to 21a in Fig 2).
14. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the electric connection skeleton is flexible (teaches that at least a part of the flat cable portion can be bent and is therefore interpreted as flexible, see first half of page 2).
17. Brenken discloses a vehicle (page 1, Description paragraph), wherein the vehicle comprises a vehicle body (vehicle body implicit), an electric device (cable, battery, and electrical connections of vehicle, Fig 1) and an electric energy transmission assembly having an electric connection skeleton (see Fig 1 and 2), the electric energy transmission assembly is detachably fixed to the vehicle body or the electric device (electric parts in vehicle are detachable) and the electric connection skeleton (2, Fig 1-3) is arranged and fixed along a contour of the vehicle body (Fig 1); wherein the electric energy transmission assembly includes at least one electric connection skeleton 2 and connectors (connection eyes 22) provided at two ends of the electric connection skeleton (see Fig 2), wherein the connector comprises a connecting terminal (connection eyes act as terminals), the two ends of the electric connection skeleton are electrically connected to the connecting terminals (ends of power cable 2 are electrically connected with 20) the electric connection skeleton comprises at least two different shapes of cross sections (Fig 2 flat cable section 22 and funnel-shaped transition piece 33), the electric connection skeleton is sleeved with an insulating layer (insulating sheath 2b and insulating layer 3, see Fig 2 and bottom of page 3, claims section), and the insulating layer covers an outside of the electric connection skeleton (layer 2b and 3 covers outside of power cable 2).
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.
Claims 2, 7, 12, 13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brenken.
2. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1, and further teaches the use of welding for other components (see page 3, claims).With regard to the electric connection skeleton connected with the connecting terminal in a welding or crimping manner, Brenken at least suggest an equivalent structure to the claimed connection means (teaches that 20 is electrically connected to 2), for the purpose of providing a suitable electrical/mechanical connection means, since In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions.") MPEP 2144.05 II A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to recognize Brenken’s structure as an equivalent structure for purpose of providing a suitable connection between the electric skeleton and connecting terminal.
7. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1; Brenken appears to further disclose a difference in cross sectional area between each two different shapes of cross sections of the electric connection skeleton (since the reference shows a transition from different shapes such as flat to round, see Fig 2), but the reference fails to specifically state that a difference in cross sectional area between each two different shapes of cross sections of the electric connection skeleton is not more than 20%. If applicable, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the dimensions such that a difference in cross sectional area between each two different shapes of cross sections of the electric connection skeleton is not more than 20%, since it has been held by the courts that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), see MPEP 2144.04. Additionally, It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to modify the sizes of the cross sections relative to on another such that a difference in cross sectional area between each two different shapes of cross sections of the electric connection skeleton is not more than 20%, 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 ordinary skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. See MPEP 2144.05.
12. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1, but fails to teach wherein a cross section of the electric connection skeleton is a polygonal shape, and all corners of the polygonal shape are chamfered or rounded. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to change the shape of the electric connection skeleton to having a polygonal shape and all corners of the polygonal shape are chamfered or rounded, since it has been held by the courts that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976) see MPEP 2144.04. It appears that the disclosed device would perform equally well shaped as disclosed by Brenken.
13. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1 further teaches a cross-sectional area of the device that appears to be within the range of 3.5 mm.sup.2 to 240 mm.sup.2 (see bottom of page 1 through top of page 2). Though, in the alternative that cable 2 is not within this range, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the dimensions such that a cross-sectional area of the device that is within the range of 3.5 mm.sup.2 to 240 mm.sup.2, since it has been held by the courts that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), see MPEP 2144.04.
18. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 17, but is silent to further teaching what the distance is from the electric connection skeleton 2 and the vehicle body and therefore fails teach the distance from the electric connection skeleton to the vehicle body is greater than or equal to 4.6 mm.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to have the electric skeleton spaced 4.6mm or greater from the vehicle to provide a suitable mounting configuration for the 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 ordinary skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. See MPEP 2144.05.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brenken in view of Brochman US PAT 10919080.
3. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1, but is silent to teaching wherein the electric connection skeleton is a rigid body, and a tensile strength of the electric connection skeleton is higher than 75 MPa. The examiner takes Official Notice that the use of rigid conduit/electrical skeletons is well known. Brochman is cited as evidence of teaching multiple types of rigid conduit including some materials with known tensile strengths greater than 75 MPa (see col 5 ln 49-63 for the use of rigid copper/stainless steel tubing). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to look to Brochman and what is known in the art and utilize a rigid material for the electrical skeleton having a strong tensile strength is desired to prevent unintentional bending of the wire member in Brenken when used in an automobile.
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brenken in view of Wang US 2019/0333657.
8. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1, but fails to further teach wherein the electric connection skeleton at least comprises a first conductor core section and a second conductor core section, and a cross section of the first conductor core section is different from a cross section of the second conductor core section. Wang teaches the electric connection skeleton at least comprises a first conductor core section and a second conductor core section (sections 11 and 12, Fig 1 and 2, paragraph 0099, 0102, 0103), and a cross section of the first conductor core section is different from a cross section of the second conductor core section (see at least paragraph 0079 teaching having a connection between two cables with different cross-sections). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to look to the teachings of Wang and utilize the electric connection skeleton that comprises at least a first conductor core section and a second conductor core section and a cross section of the first conductor core section is different from a cross section of the second conductor core section in with the device of Brenken for applications where connecting wires with cores of differing sizes is desired. One would have been motivated to make this modification to allow more versatility in connecting segments with cores of different cross-sectional sizes/shapes.
As for claim 9, Brenken in view of Wang teach the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 8, Wang teaches two cores that are electrically connected (sections 11 and 12, Fig 1 and 2, paragraph 0099, 0102, 0103) and further teaches that each portion may be insulated (0045, 0074-0078); Wang teaches the first insulating layer and the second insulating layer are connected in a fusion or welding or foaming or injection molding or bonding or spraying or plastic dipping manner (Wang teaches at least spraying, coating, molding as means for applying the insulating layers, see paragraph 0074-0077). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to utilize the insulating layers of Wang and have them connected by well-known means taught by Wang in with the device of Brenken thereby providing additional insulative protection to the wire cores in the device of Brenken.
As for claim 10, Brenken in view of Wang teach the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 8; Wang further teaches the first conductor core section and the second conductor core section are connected in a welding or crimping manner (see above for combining with Wang, see paragraph 0018 for connecting the cores by welding or crimping). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to utilize the welding or crimping taught by Wang as a means for connecting the cores to provide a suitable, well-known connection method that enables having the conductive core segments connected in the electrical device of Wang.
As for claim 11, Brenken in view of Wang teach the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 8; Wang further teaches wherein a difference in cross sectional area between the first conductor core section and the second conductor core section is not more than 20% (see paragraph 0011-0012 Wang). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to utilize the means of connecting two cores of Wang where a difference in cross sectional area between the first conductor core section and the second conductor core section is not more than 20% to prevent having the insulation layer melt (paragraph 0012 Wang).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brenken in view of Asakura US PAT 6218619.
15. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1, but fails to specifically further teach the insulating layer is further sequentially sleeved with a shielding layer and an outer insulating layer. Asakura teaches the concept of having shielding layer sleeved with an outer insulating layer over a wire/cable (see abstract). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to look to Asakura and utilize having the insulating wire of Brenken further sequentially sleeved with the shielding layer and outer insulating layer of Asakura where providing additional protection for the electrical transmission assembly is desired.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brenken in view of Sato US 2008/0190679.
16. Brenken discloses the electric energy transmission assembly according to claim 1, but is silent to teaching wherein one of the connectors is a charging socket. Sato teaches a connector that is a charging socket (paragraph 0142, abstract). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to look to Sato and utilize the electric output socket of Sato with Brenken to provide a well-known, alternate type of connector means to allow the device to be used for charging.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. OHJI US’210 discloses a vehicle skeleton support apparatus configured to be attached and disposed in a vehicle body skeleton including: first and second attachments configured to be attached at separate sections in a rigid member constituting the body skeleton. KONDA US’665 discloses a metallic pipe that accommodates a metallic conductor. A tubular-shaped insulating tube is provided between the metallic conductor and the metallic pipe.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Evan P Dzierzynski whose telephone number is (571)272-2336. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm PST.
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, Abdulmajeed Aziz can be reached at 571-270-5046. 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.
/EVAN P DZIERZYNSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
