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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the features of “a structure in which a plurality of the wires according to claim 1 are twisted together and surrounded by a shielding layer and a sheath” as claimed in claims 7-9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Specification does not provide detailed description for the claimed subject matter cited in claims 7-9. Claim 7 calls for a plurality of the wires according to claim 1 twisted together. However, the wire claimed in claim 1 does not include an insulation layer.
As shown in Figures 1 and 3, a plurality of wires 1, each including an insulation layer 4, are twisted together forming a stranded wire; a sheath 40 covers the stranded wire; and a shielding layer 30 is provided between the stranded wire and the sheath.
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, 2, 5, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mar (5483022) in view of Forbes Jones et al. (8048369).
Mar discloses a wire (18) comprising a core (22); and a shell (26) that covers an outer periphery of the core, wherein the core includes silver (col. 3 line 26), and wherein the wire has a diameter of 100 µm (col. 3 line 8, 0.012 mm = 12 µm) (re-claim 1).
Mar does not disclose the shell including:
33.0 mass% or more and 37.0 mass% or less of nickel,
9.0 mass% or more and 10.5 mass% or less of molybdenum,
19.0 mass% or more and 21.0 mass% or less of chromium,
0.5 mass% or more and 1.2 mass% or less of titanium, and a remainder including cobalt and an inevitable impurity (re-claim 1).
Forbes Jones et al. discloses wire comprising an alloy including:
33.0 mass% or more and 37.0 mass% or less of nickel,
9.0 mass% or more and 10.5 mass% or less of molybdenum,
19.0 mass% or more and 21.0 mass% or less of chromium,
0.5 mass% or more and 1.2 mass% or less of titanium, and a remainder including cobalt and an inevitable impurity (Table 1).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to use the alloy as taught by Forbes Jones et al. for the shell of Mar since such material is known in the art for being used in medical fields, as intended by the applicant (see application’s specification, paragraph [0009]).
It is noted that since the modified wire of Mar comprises structure and material as claimed, the wire will have an elongation of 12% or more (re-claim 1); and a tensile strength of 600 MPa or more (re-claim 5).
Re-claim 2, Mar discloses in a transverse cross section of the wire, a ratio of a cross-sectional area of the shell to a cross sectional area of the wire being 50% or more and 90% or less. Mar, col. 3 lines 9-10, the core takes 10% to 60% of the wire. Therefore, the shell takes 40% to 90% of the wire.
Re-claims 7 and 8, Mar, as modified, discloses a stranded wire comprising a structure in which a plurality of the wires according to claim 1 are twisted together, and a sheath (14) covers an outer periphery of the stranded wire.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (8660662) in view of Forbes Jones et al.
Li et al. discloses a wire (39) comprising a core (40); and a shell (42) that covers an outer periphery of the core, wherein the core includes silver (col. 7 line 19), and wherein the wire has a diameter of 100 µm (col. 2 lines 38-39, 0.001 in. = 25.4 µm) (re-claim 1). Li et al. also discloses the wire comprising an insulation layer (46) that covers an outer periphery of the shell (re-claim 6).
Li et al. does not disclose the shell including:
33.0 mass% or more and 37.0 mass% or less of nickel,
9.0 mass% or more and 10.5 mass% or less of molybdenum,
19.0 mass% or more and 21.0 mass% or less of chromium,
0.5 mass% or more and 1.2 mass% or less of titanium, and a remainder including cobalt and an inevitable impurity (re-claim 1).
Forbes Jones et al. discloses wire comprising an alloy including:
33.0 mass% or more and 37.0 mass% or less of nickel,
9.0 mass% or more and 10.5 mass% or less of molybdenum,
19.0 mass% or more and 21.0 mass% or less of chromium,
0.5 mass% or more and 1.2 mass% or less of titanium, and a remainder including cobalt and an inevitable impurity (Table 1).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to use the alloy as taught by Forbes Jones et al. for the shell of Li et al. since such material is known in the art for being used in medical fields, as intended by the applicant (see application’s specification, paragraph [0009]).
It is noted that since the modified wire of Li et al. comprises structure and material as claimed, the wire will have an elongation of 12% or more (re-claim 1).
Claims 1 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (2008/0047732) in view of Mar and Forbes Jones et al.
Park et al. discloses a cable comprising a stranded wire (21) which is comprised of a plurality of wires twisted together (Fig. 2); a sheath (24) covering an outer periphery of the stranded wire; and a shielding layer (27) being provided between the stranded wire and the sheath (re-claims 7-9). Park also discloses each wire, of the stranded wire 21, having a diameter of 100 µm or less ([0025]) (re-claim 1).
Park does not disclose each of the wires, in stranded wire 21, comprising a core and a shell covering the core, wherein the core includes silver, and the shell includes:
33.0 mass% or more and 37.0 mass% or less of nickel,
9.0 mass% or more and 10.5 mass% or less of molybdenum,
19.0 mass% or more and 21.0 mass% or less of chromium,
0.5 mass% or more and 1.2 mass% or less of titanium, and a remainder including cobalt and an inevitable impurity (re-claim 1).
Mar and Forbes Jones et al. disclose a wire as claimed in claim 1, see the above rejection with respect to claim 1. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to use the wire, as taught by Mar and Forbes Jones et al., for the wires, in stranded wire 21, of Park et al. since such wire is known in the art for being used in medical fields, as intended by Park et al. ([0008]).
Claims 3, 4, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mar in view of Forbes Jones et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Specht et al. (2021/0230728).
Mar and Forbes Jones et al. disclose the invention substantially as claimed except for a method of manufacturing the wire (re-claim 10).
Specht et al. discloses a method of manufacturing a wire comprising: producing a wire material by fitting a core material and a shell material; performing wire drawing onto the wire material; and performing heat treatment onto the wire material having been through the wire drawing, wherein in the performing wire drawing, intermediate heat treatment is performed at a temperature of 850°C or more and 960°C or less ([0005]) for less than 2 hours ([0013], 1500 seconds) during the wire drawing performed a plurality of times, and the intermediate heat treatment is performed 20 times or less ([0010], first cold working, first annealing which is a heat treatment, second cold working, second annealing, etc.) (re-claim 10). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to apply the method taught by Specht et al. when forming the modified wire of Mar to achieve a wire with improved fatigue life.
Re-claims 3 and 4, as disclosed in the applicant’s specification, paragraphs [0093] and [0105], the characteristics as claimed in claims 3 and 4 are obtained by the claimed process. The modified wire of Mar is formed by a method as claimed (taught by Specht) and comprises structure and material as claimed (taught by Forbes Jones). Accordingly, the modified wire of Mar would have the characteristics as claimed in claims 3 and 4.
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