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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. 120. The PCT Application Number PCT/JP2023/012069, being filed on March 27, 2023.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in present Application No. 18/850,570, filed on September 25, 2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed September 25, 2024 has been submitted for consideration by the Office. It has been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 2 & 4 lack the proper cross-hatching which indicates the type of materials, which may be in an invention. Specifically, the cross hatching to indicate the insulative materials is improper. The applicant should refer to MPEP Section 608.02 for the proper cross-hatching of materials. Correction is required.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. In certain patents, particularly those for compounds and compositions, wherein the process for making and/or the use thereof are not obvious, the abstract should set forth a process for making and/or use thereof. If the new technical disclosure involves modifications or alternatives, the abstract should mention by way of example the preferred modification or alternative.
The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following:
(1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation;
(2) if an article, its method of making;
(3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use;
(4) if a mixture, its ingredients;
(5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of apparatus should not be given.
In lines 6-9, the abstract refers to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention, which is improper content for the abstract. The applicant should delete the references to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention to provide the abstract with proper content.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words. It is important that the abstract not exceed 150 words in length since the space provided for the abstract on the computer tape used by the printer is limited. The form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as "means" and "said," should be avoided. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, "The disclosure concerns," "The disclosure defined by this invention," "The disclosure describes," etc.
Extensive mechanical and design details of apparatus should not be given.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because in lines 1-9, the abstract contains run on sentences, which is improper language for the abstract. The applicant should correct all instances of run on sentences, to provide the abstract with proper language. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inao et al (Pat Num 10,081,316, herein referred to as Inao). Inao discloses a wire harness (Figs 1-7B), which restricts vibration of the interior conductive path therefore preventing the occurrence of damage and the like after the wire harness is attached to a vehicle (Col 1, lines 48-55). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Inao discloses a wire harness (9, Fig 3) comprising a wire portion (15) that includes at least one insulated wire (18) including a conductor (20) and an insulating (21) covering an outer circumferential surface of the conductor (21), wherein a cross section perpendicular to an axial direction of the wire portion (15) having a flat shape that is longer in a width direction than in a height direction (Fig 3), a pair of exterior members (28, 29) that are respectively in contact with two surfaces (top and bottom) of the wire portion (15) in the height direction (Fig 3) and a fixing member (30, 31) fixing the pair of exterior members (28, 29) to each other with the wire portion (15) sandwiched between the exterior members (28, 29, Fig 3), wherein the wire portion (15) includes a set of a plurality of insulated wires (18, 18), wherein the exterior members (28, 29) are made of a material having a higher tensile modulus than the insulating covering (21) and have a higher bending flexibility than the wire portion(15) in the height direction (i.e. 17 may be made of metal which has a high tensile modulus of resin material insulating the conductors, Col 5, lines 31-33 and is corrugated to provide more flexibility than insulating material that is not corrugated), and the fixing member (30, 31) fixes the pair of exterior members (28, 29) to each other at a plurality of fixing positions (left and right sides) spaced apart from each other in the axial direction of the wire portion (15, Fig 3). With respect to claim 2, Inao discloses that the exterior members (28, 29) have a higher bending flexibility than the wire portion (15) in the width direction as well ( exterior 28, 29 may be made of metal which is corrugated to provide more flexibility than insulating material that is not corrugated). With respect to claim 3, Inao discloses that the two exterior members (28, 29) are each configured as a sheet material that has a bellows structure including ridges (located adjacent 32) and grooves (32) arranged next to each other in the axial direction of the wire portion (15, Fig 3). With respect to claim 7, Inao discloses that the fixing member (30, 31) is not in contact with the wire portion (15) except at end portions of the exterior members (28, 29) in the axial direction of the wire portion (15, Fig 3). With respect to claim 8, Inao discloses that the pair of exterior members (28, 29) are each larger than the wire portion (15) in the width direction (Fig 3).
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.
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) 4 & 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inao (Pat Num 10,081,316). Inao discloses a wire harness (Figs 1-7B), which restricts vibration of the interior conductive path therefore preventing the occurrence of damage and the like after the wire harness is attached to a vehicle (Col 1, lines 48-55), as applied to claim 1 above. Specifically, with respect to claim 4, Inao discloses that when the wire harness (9) is supported so as to extend in a horizontal direction (Fig 3), wherein the wire harness (3) in both the width direction and the height direction has a drooping amount that is supported so as to extend in the horizontal direction (Fig 3). With respect to claim 9, Inao discloses that the insulated wire(18, 18) is a flat wire that includes as a conductor (20, 20), wherein the flat conductors (20, 20) a pair of wires (Fig 3).
However, Inao doesn’t necessarily disclose the drooping amount being at least 70% of a drooping amount of the wire portion alone supported (claim 4), nor the flat conductor obtained by flattening a twisted wire constituted by a plurality of strands that are twisted together (claim 9).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the wire harness of Inao to comprise the drooping amount being at least 70% of a drooping amount of the wire portion alone supported, 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.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the wire harness of Inao to comprise the pair of conductors to be made by a plurality of strands being twisted together, since it is well known in the art of cables that twisting a plurality of strands together to form a twisted pairs of conductors is commonly utilizing in the field of cable to provide the conductors with protection against cross talk (Examiner takes Official Notice).
Claim(s) 5 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inao (Pat Num 10,081,316) in view of Murayama et al (Pub Num 2010/0263926, herein referred to as Murayama). Inao discloses a wire harness (Figs 1-7B), which restricts vibration of the interior conductive path therefore preventing the occurrence of damage and the like after the wire harness is attached to a vehicle (Col 1, lines 48-55), as applied to claim 1 above.
However, Inao doesn’t necessarily disclose the fixing member is constituted by a tape that has a higher flexibility than the exterior members (claim 5), nor the fixing member is spirally wound around an outer circumferential surface of an assembly constituted by the pair of exterior members and the wire portion with spaces left between turns of the fixing member in the axial direction of the wire portion (claim 6).
Murayama teaches a wire harness (Figs 1-9), that saves wiring space, is simple to assemble, while also improving durability (Paragraph 1). Specifically, with respect to claim 5, Murayama teaches a wire harness (W/H, Fig 1A-1C) comprising a wire portion (located at 20) that includes at least one insulated wire (20) including a conductor (20a) and an insulating (20b) covering an outer circumferential surface of the conductor (20a, Fig 1B), wherein a cross section perpendicular to an axial direction of the wire portion (located at 20) has a flat shape (23) that is longer in a width direction than in a height direction (Fig 1B), wherein a pair of exterior members (top 21 & bottom 21) that are respectively in contact with two surfaces of the wire portion (located at 20) in the height direction (Fig 1B) and a fixing member (left and right 22 and adhesive, Paragraphs 26 & 29) and fixing the pair of exterior members (top and bottom 21) to each other with the wire portion (located at 20) sandwiched between the exterior members (top and bottom 21), wherein the wire portion (located at 20) includes a set of a plurality of insulated wires (20’s, Fig 1B), and the fixing member (left and right 22 and adhesive, Paragraphs 26 & 29) fixes the pair of exterior members (top and bottom 21) to each other at a plurality of fixing positions (left and right sides) spaced apart from each other in the axial direction of the wire portion (Figs 1A-1B), wherein the fixing member (left and right 22) is constituted by a tape (22) that has a higher flexibility than the exterior members (top and bottom 21 as flat and can’t be flexed like the section comprising the tape 22, Fig 2). With respect to claim 6, Murayama teaches the fixing member (left and right 22) are spirally wound around an outer circumferential surface of an assembly (W/H) with spaces left between turns of the fixing member (left and right 22) in the axial direction of the wire portion (located at 20, Fig 1A).
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 wire harness of Inao to comprise the tape layer configuration as taught by Murayama because Murayama teaches that such a configuration provides a wire harness (Figs 1-9), that saves wiring space, is simple to assemble, while also improving durability (Paragraph 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to the enclosed PTO-892 form for the citation of pertinent art in the present case, all of which disclose various wire harnesses.
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
May 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights