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 provisional priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e). The provisional application being filed December 21, 2023, as Application No. 63/613,679.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed April 25, 2025 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 1 & 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 conductor and 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.
Throughout the abstract, it 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.
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) 7-10, 12-13, 17-22, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hopkinson et al (Pub Num 2014/0262411, herein referred to as Hopkinson). Hopkinson discloses a twisted pair cable (Figs 1-16) configured and capable of reducing alien crosstalk from an adjacent twisted pairs cables (Paragraph 3), while also increasing the data transmission rates (Paragraph 12), thereby resulting in a LAN cable having reduced insertion loss, matching impedance, reduced propagation delay and/or balancing delay skew between twisted pairs, while enhancing one or more mechanical characteristics, such as flexibility, reducing weight, cable diameter, and/or smoke emitted in the event of a fire (Paragraph 13). Specifically, with respect to claim 7, Hopkinson discloses a twisted pair cable (36A, Figs 6-7) comprising a conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36), an enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (7’) that is structurally configured to surround the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36), wherein the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (7’) comprises a barrier portion (9’, Fig 6A), wherein the barrier portion (9’) comprises a first end portion (folded end edge portion) and a second end portion (top end edge portion) configured to extend along a length of the twisted pair cable (31B, Fig 6), wherein the barrier portion (9’) is configured to be wrapped around the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36), such that the second end portion (top end edge portion) is positioned adjacent to and overlaps the first end portion (folded end edge portion), wherein the barrier portion (9’) includes a folded portion (F) that is folded back toward an outer surface of the barrier portion (9’) such that the folded portion (F) includes an inner fold portion (top downward fold adjacent 57 & 59) and an outer fold portion (fold located at F), wherein the outer fold portion (located at F) includes the first end portion (end of fold adjacent 59) and wherein the inner fold portion (top downward fold adjacent 57 & 59) is configured to provide a layer of the barrier portion (9’) between the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the first and second end portions (folded end edge portion and top end edge portion, respectively) of the barrier portion (9’) so as to reduce alien crosstalk between the twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36) and an adjacent twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36, Paragraph 52). With respect to claim 8, Hopkinson discloses that the barrier portion (9’) comprises an inner layer (57) and an outer layer (59). With respect to claim 9, Hopkinson discloses that the inner layer (57) comprises a non-conductive layer (Paragraph 52) and the outer layer (59) comprises a conductive layer (Paragraph 52). With respect to claim 10, Hopkinson discloses that the twisted pair cable (31B) further comprises a positioning portion (51B) disposed adjacent to the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36, Paragraph 53). With respect to claim 12, Hopkinson discloses that the folded portion (F) is configured in a U shape to provide the additional layer of the barrier portion (9’) between the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the first and second end portions (folded end edge portion and top end edge portion, respectively). With respect to claim 13, Hopkinson discloses that the folded portion (F) includes a middle fold portion (bottom fold portion adjacent (57 & 59) to the (F)) between the inner fold portion (the first top fold adjacent (57 & 59)) and the outer fold portion (located at F), wherein the middle portion (bottom fold portion adjacent (57 & 59) to the (F)) is configured to provide an additional layer between the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the first and second end portions of the barrier portion (9’) so as to reduce alien crosstalk between the twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36) and an adjacent twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36, Paragraph 52). With respect to claim 17, Hopkinson discloses a twisted pair cable (36A, Figs 6-7) comprising a conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36), an enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (7’) that is structurally configured to surround the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36), wherein the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (7’) comprises a barrier portion (9’, Fig 6A), wherein the barrier portion (9’) comprises a first end portion (folded end edge portion) and a second end portion (top end edge portion) configured to extend along a length of the twisted pair cable (31B, Fig 6), wherein the barrier portion (9’) is configured to be wrapped around the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36), such that the second end portion (top end edge portion) is positioned adjacent to and overlaps the first end portion (folded end edge portion), wherein the barrier portion (9’) includes a folded portion (F) that is folded back toward an outer surface of the barrier portion (9’) such that the folded portion (F) includes an inner fold portion (top downward fold adjacent 57 & 59) and an outer fold portion (fold located at F), wherein the outer fold portion (located at F) includes the first end portion (end of fold adjacent 59) and wherein the inner fold portion (top downward fold adjacent 57 & 59) is configured to provide a layer of the barrier portion (9’) between the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the first and second end portions (folded end edge portion and top end edge portion, respectively) of the barrier portion (9’) so as to reduce alien crosstalk between the twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36) and an adjacent twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36, Paragraph 52). With respect to claim 18, Hopkinson discloses that the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (7’) is structurally configured to surround at least a portion of the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36). With respect to claim 19, Hopkinson discloses that the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (7’) is structurally configured to be wrapped around the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36). With respect to claims 20-21, Hopkinson discloses that the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (7’) comprises an inner layer (62) and an outer layer (61), wherein the inner layer (62) comprises a non-conductive layer (Paragraph 54) and the outer layer (61) comprises a conductive layer (Paragraph 54). With respect to claim 22, Hopkinson discloses that the twisted pair cable (31B) further comprises a positioning portion (51B) disposed adjacent to the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36, Paragraph 53). With respect to claim 24, Hopkinson discloses that the folded portion (F) is configured in a U shape to provide the additional layer of the barrier portion (9’) between the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the first and second end portions (folded end edge portion and top end edge portion, respectively). With respect to claim 25, Hopkinson discloses that the folded portion (F) includes a middle fold portion (bottom fold portion adjacent (57 & 59) to the (F)) between the inner fold portion (the first top fold adjacent (57 & 59)) and the outer fold portion (located at F), wherein the middle portion (bottom fold portion adjacent (57 & 59) to the (F)) is configured to provide an additional layer between the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the first and second end portions of the barrier portion (9’) so as to reduce alien crosstalk between the twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36) and an adjacent twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36, Paragraph 52).
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) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hopkinson (Pub Num 2014/0262411) in view of Pfeiler et al (Pat Num 2006/0048961, herein referred to as Pfeiler). Hopkinson discloses a twisted pair cable (Figs 1-16) configured and capable of reducing alien crosstalk from an adjacent twisted pairs cables (Paragraph 3), while also increasing the data transmission rates (Paragraph 12), thereby resulting in a LAN cable having reduced insertion loss, matching impedance, reduced propagation delay and/or balancing delay skew between twisted pairs, while enhancing one or more mechanical characteristics, such as flexibility, reducing weight, cable diameter, and/or smoke emitted in the event of a fire (Paragraph 13). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Hopkinson discloses a twisted pair cable (36A, Figs 6-7) comprising a conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36), an enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (7’) that is structurally configured to surround the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36), a positioning portion (51B) disposed adjacent to the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36, Paragraph 53), wherein the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (7’) comprises a barrier portion (9’, Fig 6A), wherein the barrier portion (9’) comprises an non-conductive inner layer (57) and a conductive outer layer (59), wherein the barrier portion (9’) comprises a first end portion (folded end edge portion) and a second end portion (top end edge portion) configured to extend along a length of the twisted pair cable (31B, Fig 6), wherein the barrier portion (9’) is configured to be wrapped around the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the positioning portion (51B) such that the second end portion (top end edge portion) positioned adjacent to and overlaps the first end portion (bottom end edge portion, Fig 6A), wherein the barrier portion (9’) includes a folded portion (F) that is folded back toward an outer surface of the barrier portion (9’) such that the folded portion (F) includes an inner fold portion (top downward fold adjacent 57 & 59) and an outer fold portion (fold located at F), wherein the outer fold portion (located at F) includes the first end portion (end of fold adjacent 59) and wherein the inner fold portion (top downward fold adjacent 57 & 59) is configured to provide a layer of the barrier portion (9’) between the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the first and second end portions (folded end edge portion and top end edge portion, respectively) of the barrier portion (9’) so as to reduce alien crosstalk between the twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36) and an adjacent twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36, Paragraph 52). With respect to claim 2, Hopkinson discloses that the folded portion (F) is configured in a U shape to provide the additional layer of the barrier portion (9’) between the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the first and second end portions (folded end edge portion and top end edge portion, respectively). With respect to claim 3, Hopkinson discloses that the folded portion (F) includes a middle fold portion (bottom fold portion adjacent (57 & 59) to the (F)) between the inner fold portion (the first top fold adjacent (57 & 59)) and the outer fold portion (located at F), wherein the middle portion (bottom fold portion adjacent (57 & 59) to the (F)) is configured to provide an additional layer between the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the first and second end portions of the barrier portion (9’) so as to reduce alien crosstalk between the twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36) and an adjacent twisted pair cable (33, 34, 35, 36, Paragraph 52). With respect to claim 4, Hopkinson discloses that the folded portion (F) is configured in a U shape to provide the additional layer of the barrier portion (9’) between the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) and the first and second end portions (folded end edge portion and top end edge portion, respectively). With respect to claim 5, Hopkinson discloses that the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) comprises a first conductor (37A & 37B) and a second conductor (38A & 38B) comprising a first twisted pair of conductors (33), further comprising a second conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) comprising a second twisted pair of conductors (34) and wherein the positioning portion (51B) is configured to position the barrier portion (9’) to substantially equalize crosstalk between the first twisted pairs of conductors (33) and to the second twisted pair of conductors (34, Paragraph 56).
While Hopkinson discloses the inner fold portion (the first top fold adjacent (27 & 59)) and a positioning portion (51B), Hopkinson doesn’t necessarily disclose the inner fold portion of the barrier portion being configured to be affixed to the positioning portion such the barrier portion is fixedly positioned relative to the positioning portion (claim 1), nor the positioning portion being configured to position the end portions of the barrier portion (claim 5).
Pfeiler teaches a twisted pair cable (Figs 1-9) configured and capable of reducing alien crosstalk from an adjacent twisted pairs cables (Paragraphs 12-13), while also protecting the surroundings against any energies that may radiate from the cable and protects the transmission elements inside cable by screening properties (Paragraph 5), thereby avoiding malfunction and possibly of damages of equipment connected to the twisted pair cable that may be caused by varying potentials (Paragraph 5). Specifically, with respect to claims 1 & 5, Pfeiler teaches a twisted pair cable (Fig 6) comprising a conductor portion (13, 13, 13, 13), an enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (1’) that is structurally configured to surround the conductor portion (13, 13, 13, 13), a positioning portion (9) disposed adjacent to the conductor portion (13, 13, 13, 13, Paragraph 29), wherein the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (1’) comprises a barrier portion (located at 15), wherein the barrier portion (located at 15) comprises an non-conductive inner layer (2) and a conductive outer layer (3), wherein the barrier portion (located at 15) comprises a first end portion (bottom 11) and a second end portion (top 11) configured to extend along a length of the twisted pair cable (Fig 6), wherein the barrier portion (located at 15) is configured to be wrapped around the conductor portion (13, 13, 13, 13) and the positioning portion (9) such that the second end portion (top 11) positioned adjacent to and overlaps the first end portion (bottom 11), wherein the barrier portion (located at 15) includes a folded down portion (located at 11) and the first and second end portions (bottom and top 11, respectively) of the barrier portion (located at 15) so as to reduce alien crosstalk between the twisted pair cable (13, 13, 13, 13) and an adjacent twisted pair cable (13, 13, 13, 13, Paragraph 30), wherein the inner fold portion (bottom 11) of the barrier portion (located at 15) is configured to be affixed to the positioning portion (9), such the barrier portion (located at 15) is fixedly positioned relative to the positioning portion (9, i.e. the overlapping edges 11 and the top of positioning portion 9 are welded together to completely screen the cable, Paragraph 30, Fig 6).
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 twisted pair cable of Hopkinson to comprise the inner fold portion of the barrier portion being configured to be affixed to the positioning portion such the barrier portion is fixedly positioned relative to the positioning portion configuration as taught by Pfeiler because Pfeiler teaches that such a configuration provides a twisted pair cable (Figs 1-9) configured and capable of reducing alien crosstalk from an adjacent twisted pairs cables (Paragraphs 12-13), while also protecting the surroundings against any energies that may radiate from the cable and protects the transmission elements inside cable by screening properties (Paragraph 5), thereby avoiding malfunction and possibly of damages of equipment connected to the twisted pair cable that may be caused by varying potentials (Paragraph 5) and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70
Modified Hopkinson doesn’t necessarily disclose the folded portion being configured in an S shape (claim 4), nor the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion being configured to reduce alien crosstalk by 3dB (claim 6).
With respect to claim 4, 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 folded portion of modified Hopkinson to comprise an S shape rather than an U shape, since it has been held that a change in form cannot sustain patentability where involved is only extended application of obvious attributes from a prior art. In re Span-Deck Inc. vs. Fab-Con Inc. (CA 8, 1982) 215 USPQ 835.
With respect to claim 6, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion of modified Hopkinson to comprise the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion being configured to reduce alien crosstalk by 3dB, 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.
Claim(s) 11, 14-16, 23, and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hopkinson (Pub Num 2014/0262411) in view of Pfeiler et al (Pat Num 2006/0048961, herein referred to as Pfeiler). Hopkinson discloses a twisted pair cable (Figs 1-16) configured and capable of reducing alien crosstalk from an adjacent twisted pairs cables (Paragraph 3), while also increasing the data transmission rates (Paragraph 12), thereby resulting in a LAN cable having reduced insertion loss, matching impedance, reduced propagation delay and/or balancing delay skew between twisted pairs, while enhancing one or more mechanical characteristics, such as flexibility, reducing weight, cable diameter, and/or smoke emitted in the event of a fire (Paragraph 13), as disclosed above with respect to claims 7, 10, 13, 17, 22, and 25 above. Specifically, with respect to claim 15, Hopkinson discloses that the conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) comprises a first conductor (37A & 37B) and a second conductor (38A & 38B) comprising a first twisted pair of conductors (33), further comprising a second conductor portion (33, 34, 35, 36) comprising a second twisted pair of conductors (34) and wherein the positioning portion (51B) is configured to position the barrier portion (9’) to substantially equalize crosstalk between the first twisted pairs of conductors (33) and to the second twisted pair of conductors (34, Paragraph 56).
While Hopkinson discloses the inner fold portion (the first top fold adjacent (27 & 59)) and a positioning portion (51B), Hopkinson doesn’t necessarily disclose the inner fold portion of the barrier portion being configured to be affixed to the positioning portion such the barrier portion is fixedly positioned relative to the positioning portion (claims 11 & 23), nor the positioning portion being configured to position the end portions of the barrier portion (claims 15 & 27).
Pfeiler teaches a twisted pair cable (Figs 1-9) configured and capable of reducing alien crosstalk from an adjacent twisted pairs cables (Paragraphs 12-13), while also protecting the surroundings against any energies that may radiate from the cable and protects the transmission elements inside cable by screening properties (Paragraph 5), thereby avoiding malfunction and possibly of damages of equipment connected to the twisted pair cable that may be caused by varying potentials (Paragraph 5). Specifically, with respect to claims 11, 15, 23, & 27, Pfeiler teaches a twisted pair cable (Fig 6) comprising a conductor portion (13, 13, 13, 13), an enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (1’) that is structurally configured to surround the conductor portion (13, 13, 13, 13), a positioning portion (9) disposed adjacent to the conductor portion (13, 13, 13, 13, Paragraph 29), wherein the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion (1’) comprises a barrier portion (located at 15), wherein the barrier portion (located at 15) comprises an non-conductive inner layer (2) and a conductive outer layer (3), wherein the barrier portion (located at 15) comprises a first end portion (bottom 11) and a second end portion (top 11) configured to extend along a length of the twisted pair cable (Fig 6), wherein the barrier portion (located at 15) is configured to be wrapped around the conductor portion (13, 13, 13, 13) and the positioning portion (9) such that the second end portion (top 11) positioned adjacent to and overlaps the first end portion (bottom 11), wherein the barrier portion (located at 15) includes a folded down portion (located at 11) and the first and second end portions (bottom and top 11, respectively) of the barrier portion (located at 15) so as to reduce alien crosstalk between the twisted pair cable (13, 13, 13, 13) and an adjacent twisted pair cable (13, 13, 13, 13, Paragraph 30), wherein the inner fold portion (bottom 11) of the barrier portion (located at 15) is configured to be affixed to the positioning portion (9), such the barrier portion (located at 15) is fixedly positioned relative to the positioning portion (9, i.e. the overlapping edges 11 and the top of positioning portion 9 are welded together to completely screen the cable, Paragraph 30, Fig 6).
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 twisted pair cable of Hopkinson to comprise the inner fold portion of the barrier portion being configured to be affixed to the positioning portion such the barrier portion is fixedly positioned relative to the positioning portion configuration as taught by Pfeiler because Pfeiler teaches that such a configuration provides a twisted pair cable (Figs 1-9) configured and capable of reducing alien crosstalk from an adjacent twisted pairs cables (Paragraphs 12-13), while also protecting the surroundings against any energies that may radiate from the cable and protects the transmission elements inside cable by screening properties (Paragraph 5), thereby avoiding malfunction and possibly of damages of equipment connected to the twisted pair cable that may be caused by varying potentials (Paragraph 5) and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70
Modified Hopkinson doesn’t necessarily disclose the folded portion being configured in an S shape (claims 14 & 26), nor the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion being configured to reduce alien crosstalk by 3dB (claims 16 & 28).
With respect to claims 14 & 26, 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 folded portion of modified Hopkinson to comprise an S shape rather than an U shape, since it has been held that a change in form cannot sustain patentability where involved is only extended application of obvious attributes from a prior art. In re Span-Deck Inc. vs. Fab-Con Inc. (CA 8, 1982) 215 USPQ 835.
With respect to claims 16 & 28, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion of modified Hopkinson to comprise the enhanced alien crosstalk mitigation portion being configured to reduce alien crosstalk by 3dB, 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
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 twisted pair cables configured and capable of reducing alien crosstalk from an adjacent twisted pairs cables.
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
September 5, 2026
