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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 18, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-8 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 claim 8 recites: “a first reference mark is provided at a portion in a peripheral direction” and “a second reference mark is provided at a portion in a peripheral direction” (claim 1); and “a first reference mark on a portion in a peripheral direction” and “a second reference mark on apportion in a peripheral direction”. The phrase "a portion in a peripheral direction" is unclear. A "direction" is not a physical location or surface portion.
The examiner will interpret the claims to be:
Claim 1: "first reference mark is provided on a portion of an outer peripheral surface of the insulating covering" and " a second reference mark provided on a portion of an outer peripheral surface of the exposed portion of one of the plurality of electric wires, “ and
Claim 8: "providing a first reference mark on a portion of an outer peripheral surface of the insulating covering" and " providing a second reference mark on a portion of an outer peripheral surface of the exposed portion of one of the plurality of electric wires.
In claim 2, the term “non-twistable range” is unclear because the claim does not define what makes a range "non-twistable." The claim also does not provide an objective boundary for where the "non-twistable range" begins or ends. Whether a portion is "non-twistable" may depend on material, applied force, operator handling, installation conditions, or degree of permissible twist. Because the scope of the term cannot be determined with reasonable certainty, claim 2 is indefinite.
The applicant will interpret the claim to be " a region extending a predetermined distance from the end portion of the insulating covering."
In claim 3, the term “"in a view from a radially outer side of the insulating covering" is unclear because the viewing direction, reference axis, or projection plane is uncertain.
In claim 4, the phrase “level difference between….is the smallest” is not properly defined. The claim also does not identify a reference plane, coordinate system, measurement direction, or comparison basis for determining where the level difference is "smallest."
The examiner will interpret claims 1 and 8 to read:
1. A composite electric wire comprising: a plurality of electric wires; andan insulating covering that covers the plurality of electric wires, wherein each of the plurality of electric wires includes an exposed portion extending beyond an end portion of the insulating covering, a first reference mark is provided on a portion of an outer peripheral surface of the insulating covering, and a second reference mark is provided on a portion of an outer peripheral surface of the exposed portion of one of the plurality of electric wires.8. A method for manufacturing a composite electric wire, comprising:providing a first reference mark at a circumferential position on an outer peripheral surface of an insulating covering that collectively covers a plurality of electric wires;fixing a first attachment member to the insulating covering based on the circumferential position of the first reference mark; providing a second reference mark at a circumferential position on an outer peripheral surface of an exposed portion of one of the plurality of electric wires, the exposed portion extending beyond an end portion of the insulating covering; and fixing a second attachment member to the exposed portion based on the circumferential position of the second reference mark.
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) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayakawa (US 11,987,188) in view of Yamamoto (US 2024/0087771).
In regards to claim 1, Hayakawa teaches a composite electric wire (5) comprising: a plurality of electric wires (2, 3); and an insulating covering (4) that covers the plurality of electric wires (see figure 4), wherein each of the plurality of electric wires (2, 3) includes an exposed portion extending beyond an end portion of the insulating covering (see the exposed portions positioned outside of the outer sheath (4)).
Hayakawa does not teach a first reference mark is provided on a portion of an outer peripheral surface of the insulating covering, and a second reference mark is provided on a portion of an outer peripheral surface of the exposed portion of one of the plurality of electric wires.
Yamamoto teaches a first reference mark (350) is provided on a portion of an outer peripheral surface of the insulating covering (35) indicating the position of the fourth electric wire.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include a marking on the outer peripheral surface of the exposed portion of one of the electric wires disclosed by Hayakawa and Yamamoto. The marking would identify the inner wire if the wire shifted within the outer sheath or insulation, allowing the inner wire to be recognized by the user when the outer sheath or insulation exposes the inner wires.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cook et al. (US 11,081,260) teaches physical indicia used to identify a plurality of wires; Lyvytsky et al. (US 11,025,040) and Roy, Sr. (US 5,305,797) teaches indicium disposed on the interior channel of an electrical conduit. Kin (Us 5,281,764) teaches a second insulating coating different in color from said first insulating coating.
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