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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on September 16, 2024 and December 16, 2024 have been considered by the Examiner.
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, 2, 5, 7-9, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Clark (US 7,135,641).
Regarding claim 1, Clark discloses a communication cable (see figure 3) comprising: an inner core (101) comprising: a plurality of twisted pairs of conductors (103), wherein each twisted pair of conductors includes different pair lay lengths (column 6 lines 57-67); a separator (102) comprising at least four segment housing areas and a central inner space (107), wherein at least four of the segment housing areas houses a twisted pair of conductors (103; see figure 3); and an optical fiber (109) housed within the central inner space (107).
Regarding claim 2, Clark discloses the communication cable (see figure 3), wherein the optical fiber (109) includes one or more core fibers configured to transmit optical communications signals (column 5 lines 11-16).
Regarding claim 5, Clark discloses the communication cable (see figure 3), wherein the separator (102) further comprises at least one strength member (109; column 5 lines 11-16).
Regarding claim 7, Clark discloses the communication cable (see figure 3), wherein the separator (102) contains semiconductor material to improve an electrical property of the cable (column 5 lines 17-39).
Regarding claim 8, Clark discloses the communication cable (see figure 3), wherein the separator (102) is 3configured in a symmetric shape that includes four segment housing areas (see figure 1), each of the four segment housing areas configured to house a twisted pair of conductors (103).
Regarding claim 9, Clark discloses the communication cable (see figure 3), wherein the twisted pair of conductors (103) are sized to include and be between 22 AWG to 26 AWG (column 3 lines 12-13; Belden 1711a cable; usually a 24 AWG Cat 5 cable; or column 8 line 50-58; table 1; insulation diameter).
Regarding claim 14, Clark discloses the communication cable (see figure 3), wherein the optical fiber (109) is terminated with one of a fusion splicing pigtail or splice-on connector (well known in the art; standard in fiber optics).
Regarding claim 15, Clark discloses the communication cable (see figure 3), wherein the optical fiber (109) is factory pre-terminated (well known in the art; standard in fiber optics).
4. Claims 1, 3, 4, 9, 12, 13, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Kalisz et al (EP 3214626; cited in the IDS; hereinafter Kalisz).
Regarding claim 1, Kalisk discloses a communication cable (see figure 1) comprising: an inner core (see figure 1) comprising: a plurality of twisted pairs of conductors (9), wherein each twisted pair of conductors includes different pair lay lengths (see figure 1); a separator (1) comprising at least four segment housing areas and a central inner space (see figures 1), wherein at least four of the segment housing areas houses a twisted pair of conductors (9; see figure 1); and an optical fiber (4) housed within the central inner space (see figures 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 3, Kalisz discloses the communication cable (see figure 1), wherein the optical fiber (4) is a multimode fiber with a buffer diameter between 0.25 mm and 0.9 mm (paragraph 0008 lines 45-48; and paragraph 0011).
Regarding claim 4, Kalisz discloses the communication cable (see figure 1), wherein the optical fiber (4) is a single mode fiber with a buffer diameter between 0.25 mm and 0.9 mm (paragraph 0008 lines 45-48; and paragraph 0011).
Regarding claim 9, Kalisz discloses the communication cable (see figure 1), wherein the twisted pair of conductors (9) are sized to include and be between 22 AWG to 26 AWG (paragraph 0011 line 43-46).
Regarding claim 12, Kalisz discloses the communication cable (see figure 1), wherein the separator (1) comprises a fifth segment housing area (see figures 1 and 2) configured to house one more optical fibers (6).
Regarding claim 13, Kalisz discloses the communication cable (see figure 1), wherein the fifth segment housing (see figure 1) includes a subunit (8) configured to house the one or more optical fibers (6), and wherein the subunit (8) comprises a circular tube with insulation thickness and strength members that protect the one or more optical fibers housed inside the subunit (see figure 2).
Regarding claim 16, Kalisz discloses a communication cable (see figure 1) comprising: an inner core (see figure 1) comprising: a plurality of twisted pairs of conductors (9), wherein each twisted pair of conductors (9) includes different pair lay lengths (see figure 1); a separator (1) comprising at least five segment housing areas (see figure 1), wherein at least four of the segment housing areas houses a twisted pair of conductors (9); and an optical fiber (6) housed within a fifth segment housing area (see figures1 and 2).
Regarding claim 17, Kalisz discloses the communication cable (see figure 1), the separator (1) further comprising a subunit (8) inside the fifth segment housing area, the subunit (8) housing the optical fiber (6).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (US 7,135,641).
Regarding claim 6, Clark discloses the claimed invention except for the at least one strength member being located in an area of the separator that is less than or equal to 0.3 square millimeters. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effecting filing date of the claimed invention to provide to Clark’s communication cable with at least one strength member being located in an area of the separator that is less than or equal to 0.3 square millimeters to reduce physical tension and managing weight. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235.
6. Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (US 7,135,641) in view of Lanoe et al (US 10,867,724; hereinafter Lanoe).
Regarding claim 10, Clark discloses the claimed invention except for each twisted pair of conductors being configured to transmit a power signal having voltages of up to 400V and currents up to 0.5 A per wire. Lanoe teaches a communication cable (100) having a twisted pair of conductors (105) being configured to transmit a power signal having voltages of up to 400V and currents up to 0.5 A per wire (column 4 lines 10-33). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effecting filing date of the claimed invention to provide to Clark’s communication cable with the twisted pair of conductors being configured to transmit a power signal having voltages of up to 400V and currents up to 0.5 A as taught by Lanoe to provide a cable that can be used in certain heavy duty, commercial or specialized tech applications. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235.
Regarding claim 11, Clark discloses the claimed invention except for the communication cable, wherein a diameter of the inner core is less than 2.7 mm. Lanoe teaches a communication cable (100) having inner core with a diameter of less than 2.7mm (column 4 lines 3-10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effecting filing date of the claimed to provide to Clark’s communication cable with the diameter of the inner core being less than 2.7 mm as taught by Lanoe to improve thermal management, enhance flexibility and reduce clutter. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Welch (US 9,837,802), Kim et al (US 8,785,782), Petry et al (US 2012/0267146), Siripurapu et al (US 11,107,607) and Lee et al (US 11,087,903) disclose a communication cable.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to Angel R. Estrada at telephone number (571) 272-1973. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:30am -5:00pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Imani N. 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 USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) OR 571-272-1000.
May 23, 2026
/ANGEL R ESTRADA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights