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
This application is a Continuation of PCT/JP2023/038193 filed on October 23, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted November 25, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: "an auxiliary connecter being installed..." should read "connector.". Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 3 recites: "both side end portions": The term "both side end portions" is indefinite and ambiguous. It is unclear whether "side" refers to the longitudinal side edges (e.g., along the length/width border) or the longitudinal terminal ends (opposite axial ends) of the linear flexible printed circuit (FPC).
Antecedent Basis / Functional Boundary ("external connector"): Claim 1 recites "each of the plurality of connectors has a structure of being engaged with an external connector attached to an external electric wire." Reciting functional compatibility with an unclaimed external element creates ambiguity as to whether the "external connector" and "external electric wire" are structural limitations required by Claim 1 or merely intended use/environment.
The term "both side end portions" also lacks is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The examiner will interpret the claim 1 to read “A trunk line of a wire harness, comprising: a flexible printed circuit having a linear shape and two lateral side end portions; and a plurality of connectors, one or more of the plurality of connectors being installed at both lateral side end portions of the flexible printed circuit, wherein each of the plurality of connectors are connected to an external connector that is attached to an external electric wire.”
The examiner will interpret the claim 3 to read “A wire harness, comprising: a trunk line; and a plurality of branch lines being electrically connected to the trunk line, wherein the trunk line includes a flexible printed circuit having a linear shape and two lateral side end portions; and a plurality of connectors, one or more of the plurality of connectors being installed at both lateral side end portions of the flexible printed circuit, wherein each of the plurality of connectors are connected to an external connector that is attached to an external electric wire, and each of the plurality of branch lines is configured by the electric wire including one lateral end portion to which the external connector is engaged with the connector of the trunk line is attached.”
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Terunuma (JP 2003/180018).
In regards to claim 1, Terunuma teaches a trunk line of a wire harness (see figure 7), comprising: a flexible printed circuit (33) having a linear shape (see figure 7) and two lateral side end portions (top and bottom sides of (33) see figure 7); and a plurality of connectors (39, a, b, c), one or more of the plurality of connectors (39, a, b, c) being installed at both lateral side end portions (top and bottom sides of (33) see figure 7) of the flexible printed circuit (33), wherein each of the plurality of connectors (39, a, b, c) are connected to an external connector (20a) that is attached to an external electric wire (30’).
In regards to claim 3, Terunuma a teaches a wire harness (see figure 7), comprising: a trunk line (33); and a plurality of branch lines (34) being electrically connected to the trunk line (33) wherein the trunk line includes a flexible printed circuit (33) having a linear shape and two lateral side end portions (top and bottom sides of (33) see figure 7); and a plurality of connectors (39, a, b, c), one or more of the plurality of connectors (39, a, b, c) being installed at both lateral side end portions (top and bottom sides of (33) see figure 7) of the flexible printed circuit (33), wherein each of the plurality of connectors (39, a, b, c) are connected to an external connector (20a) that is attached to an external electric wire (30’), and each of the plurality of branch lines (34) is configured by the electric wire (30b’) including one lateral end portion (top and bottom sides of (33) see figure 7) to which the external connector (20a) is engaged with the connector of the trunk line (33) is attached.
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.
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) 2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terunuma (JP 2003/180018).
In regards to claim 2, Terunuma teaches the trunk line of a wire harness according to claim 1.
Terunuma does not teach a length of the flexible printed circuit falls within a range from 500 mm to 1,500 mm, and a width of the flexible printed circuit falls within a range from 40 mm to 100 mm.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have made a length of the flexible printed circuit falls within a range from 500 mm to 1,500 mm, and a width of the flexible printed circuit falls within a range from 40 mm to 100 mm, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
In regards to claim 6, Terunuma teaches the trunk line of a wire harness according to claim 3.
Terunuma does not teach a length of the flexible printed circuit falls within a range from 500 mm to 1,500 mm, and a width of the flexible printed circuit falls within a range from 40 mm to 100 mm.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have made a length of the flexible printed circuit falls within a range from 500 mm to 1,500 mm, and a width of the flexible printed circuit falls within a range from 40 mm to 100 mm, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Takeda (US 5,739,470) teaches an auxiliary wall; Ortiz (US 2023/0269870) teaches a flexible interconnect circuit with a trunk and branch lines; Kondo (US 6,02,607) teaches a wiring harness with a flexible trunk line; Dijkshoorn (US 5,130,99) teaches a flexible circuit with branch lines.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRYSTAL ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9258. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-5 M-F.
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, Timothy Dole can be reached on (571)-272-2229. 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.
/KRYSTAL ROBINSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2848
Prosecution Insights