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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-8, 11-13, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US4329539) in view of NPL, Network Cable Propagation Delay.
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Tanaka discloses a method of manufacturing a communication cable (abstract) comprising: providing a first and second pair of polymer insulated conductors, wherein each pair of polymer insulated conductors comprises two polymer insulated conductors, and wherein each polymer insulated conductor has a first hardness, wherein the first hardness is the hardness of the polymer insulated conductor at ambient conditions (t is inherent that at a temperature below T1 the cable will have a first hardness at ambient conditions col 18 lines 18-23; figure 30);
temporarily changing the hardness of the polymer insulated conductors in the first pair of polymer insulated conductors to a second hardness, wherein the second hardness is different than the first hardness ((Col 18, In 23-52- In the temperature range B, (between T1 and T2), the first metal used as the matrix is rapidly softened and presents a noticeably decreased resistance to deformation. The cold working is effected by repeating annealing when the matrix of the composite body already annealed in the temperature range B has its hardness increased to a level of H1 by work-hardening, thereby deforming the matrix metal preferentially through repetition of the above-mentioned operation. Treatment in the aforesaid temperature range B is applicable to extrusion, drawing, stranding, rolling for example by the Turk's head roll, groove rolling and two step - or multi step- rolling all applied in the cable manufacturing method of this invention),
twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the first pair together while the polymer insulated conductors of the first pair are at the second hardness to form a first twisted pair (column 9 lines 1-5),
Tanaka does not explicitly disclose the first twisted pair having a first propagation delay over 100 meters; allowing the first twisted pair to return to the first hardness, twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the second pair together to form a second twisted pair, the second twisted pair having a second propagation delay over 100 meters; and wherein the difference in propagation delay over 100 meters for the first and second propagation delays over 100 meters are within 100 nanoseconds of each other; wherein the difference in propagation delay over 100 meters for the first and second propagation delays over 100 meters are within 50 nanoseconds of each other. However, according to NPL, propagation delay occurs due to cable length and temperature increase. Therefore, propagation delay is a result effective variable. It is well settled that determination of optimum values of cause effective variables such as these process parameters is within the skill of one practicing in the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made having a first propagation delay over 100 meters; allowing the first twisted pair to return to the first hardness, twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the second pair together to form a second twisted pair, the second twisted pair having a second propagation delay over 100 meters; and wherein the difference in propagation delay over 100 meters for the first and second propagation delays over 100 meters are within 100 nanoseconds of each other since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 3, Tanaka discloses wherein the step of temporarily changing the hardness of the polymer insulated conductors in the first pair of polymer insulated conductors comprises cooling the polymer insulated conductors in the first pair for a first time period (Col 27, In 53-60- The assembly was heat-treated 34.5 hours at 680 degrees centigrade. The assembly was further heated 30 minutes in said furnace which was more evacuated to 5(times)10-5 mm Hg, followed by cooling; Col 18, In 11-17-As used herein, the term "recrystallization temperature" is defined to mean a level at which the metal presents hardness lying in the middle of the fully hardened and the fully softened states. The recrystallization temperature is chosen to be about 450 degrees centigrade for Cu-Sn alloy, about 580 degrees centigrade. for Nb, about 400 degrees centigrade for Cu-Ga alloy and about 530 degrees centigrade for V).
Regarding claim 6, Tanaka does not explicitly disclose further comprising the steps of temporarily changing the hardness of the polymer insulated conductors in the second pair of polymer insulated conductors to a second hardness, wherein the second hardness is different than the first hardness; twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the second pair together while the polymer insulated conductors of the second pair are at their second hardness; and allowing the second twisted pair to return to the first hardness. However, Tanaka discloses ((Col 18, In 23-52- In the temperature range B, (between T1 and T2 The cold working is effected by repeating annealing when the matrix of the composite body already annealed in the temperature range B has its hardness increased to a level of H1 by work-hardening, thereby deforming the matrix metal preferentially through repetition of the above-mentioned operation. Treatment in the aforesaid temperature range B is applicable to extrusion, drawing, stranding, rolling for example by the Turk's head roll, groove rolling and two step - or multi step- rolling all applied in the cable manufacturing method of this invention (figure 30). Therefore, the first metal used as the matrix is rapidly softened and presents a noticeably decreased resistance to deformation, which reads on temporarily changing the hardness of the polymer insulated conductors in the second pair of polymer insulated conductors to a second hardness, wherein the second hardness is different than the first hardness. As for twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the second pair together while the polymer insulated conductors of the second pair are at their second hardness; and allowing the second twisted pair to return to the first hardness, Tanak discloses this in column 9 lines 60+) . MPEP 2144.04 states duplications of parts or methods or rearrangement of method steps is within the skillset of one ordinary skilled in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated temporarily changing the hardness of the polymer insulated conductors in the second pair of polymer insulated conductors to a second hardness, wherein the second hardness is different than the first hardness; twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the second pair together while the polymer insulated conductors of the second pair are at their second hardness; and allowing the second twisted pair to return to the first hardness since it has been held that a mere duplication of steps involves routine skill in the art.
Regarding claims 11-13, Tanaka discloses a method of manufacturing a communication cable (abstract) comprising: providing a first and second pair of polymer insulated conductors, wherein each pair of polymer insulated conductors comprises two polymer insulated conductors, and wherein each polymer insulated conductor has a first hardness, wherein the first hardness is the hardness of the polymer insulated conductor at ambient conditions (it is inherent that at a temperature below T1 the cable will have a first hardness at ambient conditions col 18 lines 18-23; figure 30);
temporarily changing the hardness of the polymer insulated conductors in the first pair of polymer insulated conductors to a second hardness, wherein the second hardness is different than the first hardness ((Col 18, In 23-52- In the temperature range B, (between T1 and T2), the first metal used as the matrix is rapidly softened and presents a noticeably decreased resistance to deformation. The cold working is effected by repeating annealing when the matrix of the composite body already annealed in the temperature range B has its hardness increased to a level of H1 by work-hardening, thereby deforming the matrix metal preferentially through repetition of the above-mentioned operation. Treatment in the aforesaid temperature range B is applicable to extrusion, drawing, stranding, rolling for example by the Turk's head roll, groove rolling and two step - or multi step- rolling all applied in the cable manufacturing method of this invention),
twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the first pair together while the polymer insulated conductors of the first pair are at the second hardness to form a first twisted pair (column 9 lines 1-5),
Tanaka does not explicitly disclose the first twisted pair having a first propagation delay over 100 meters; allowing the first twisted pair to return to the first hardness, twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the second pair together to form a second twisted pair, the second twisted pair having a second propagation delay over 100 meters; twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the third pair together to form a third twisted pair, the third twisted pair having a third propagation delay over 100 meter; and twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the fourth pair together to form a fourth twisted pair, the fourth twisted pair having a fourth propagation delay over 100 meters, and twisting the polymer insulated conductors and wherein the difference in propagation delay over 100 meters for the first and second propagation delays over 100 meters for the first, second, third, and fourth propagation delays over 100 meters are within 25nanoseconds of each other.
However, according to NPL, propagation delay occurs due to cable length and temperature increase. Therefore, propagation delay is a result effective variable. It is well settled that determination of optimum values of cause effective variables such as these process parameters is within the skill of one practicing in the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Further it would be obvious to have multiple pairs (etc., third, fourth) since duplication of parts/methods are within the skillset of one ordinary skill in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the first twisted pair having a first propagation delay over 100 meters; allowing the first twisted pair to return to the first hardness, twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the second pair together to form a second twisted pair, the second twisted pair having a second propagation delay over 100 meters; twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the third pair together to form a third twisted pair, the third twisted pair having a third propagation delay over 100 meter; and twisting the polymer insulated conductors of the fourth pair together to form a fourth twisted pair, the fourth twisted pair having a fourth propagation delay over 100 meters, and and twisting the polymer insulated conductors and wherein the difference in propagation delay over 100 meters for the first and second propagation delays over 100 meters for the first, second, third, and fourth propagation delays over 100 meters are within 100 nanoseconds of each other since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claims 7 and 15, Tanaka discloses wherein the step of temporarily changing the hardness of the polymer insulated conductors in the first and second pairs of polymer insulated conductors comprises cooling the polymer insulated conductors in the first pair for a first time and second time period respectively (Col 27, In 53-60- The assembly was heat-treated 34.5 hours at 680 degrees centigrade. The assembly was further heated 30 minutes in said furnace which was more evacuated to 5(times)10-5 mm Hg, followed by cooling; Col 18, In 11-17-As used herein, the term "recrystallization temperature" is defined to mean a level at which the metal presents hardness lying in the middle of the fully hardened and the fully softened states. The recrystallization temperature is chosen to be about 450 degrees centigrade for Cu-Sn alloy, about 580 degrees centigrade. for Nb, about 400 degrees centigrade for Cu-Ga alloy and about 530 degrees centigrade for V). As for repeating the steps for the second pair, since it has been held that a mere duplication of steps involves routine skill in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the step of temporarily changing the hardness of the polymer insulated conductors in the first and second pairs of polymer insulated conductors comprises cooling the polymer insulated conductors in the first pair for a first time and second time period respectively since it has been held that a mere duplication of steps involves routine skill in the art.
Regarding claims 8 and 16, Tanaka does not explicitly disclose wherein the first time period and the second time periods are different. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated and first time period and a second time period that are different given the limited number of options. MPEP 2144.05 states obvious to try given the limited number of options is within the skillset of one ordinary skilled in the art.
Claim(s) 4-5 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US4329539) in view of NPL, Network Cable Propagation Delay, as applied to claim 3, in view of Rey (US2016/0053596 A1).
Regarding claims 4-5 and 14, Tanaka does not explicitly disclose wherein the step of cooling the polymer insulated conductors comprises exposing the polymer insulated conductors to a chilled fluid that has a temperature of less than 00C; wherein the step of temporarily changing the hardness of the polymer insulated conductors in the first pair of polymer insulated conductors comprises exposing the polymer insulated conductors in the first pair to a cryogenic liquid. Analogous cable art Rey discloses the non-superconducting power transmission cable (e.g. copper or aluminum cable) is cooled with a cryogenic cooling fluid while the heat source operates at a warm ambient temperature. A compact low heat leak hermetic power feed-through electrically connects the non-superconducting power transmission cable operating at cold cryogenic temperature to the heat source operating at hot ambient temperatures. The heat source could be one or more non-superconducting coils inductively coupled to a well casing, an electric resistive heater, or a non-superconducting antenna. The cryogenic cooling fluid could be nitrogen, air, natural gas, methane, oxygen, argon, hydrogen, neon, helium, mixtures thereof, among other cryogenic cooling fluids. The cryogenic cooling fluid could be pressurized and sub-cooled to further reduce the temperature and hence lower the electrical resistance and reduce the chance of gas bubble formation [0030].Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included cooling the polymer cable with cryogenic liquid, as taught by Rey, into the method taught by Tanaka for the benefit of allowing higher power transmission density, both per unit volume and per unit mass, with far greater transmission efficacy.
Claim(s) 9-10 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US4329539) in view of NPL, Network Cable Propagation Delay, as applied to claim 1 or 11, in view of Rogers (US 2024/0112834 A).
Regarding claims 9 and 17, Tanaka does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one pair of polymer insulated conductors is insulated with a fluorinated polymer. However, analogous art, Rogers et al discloses using fluorinated polymer to prevent burning [abstract; claim 6]. MPEP 2144.05 states Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized fluorinated polymer since it has been held to be within the ordinary skill of worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use.
Regarding claims 10 and 18, Tanaka doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein at least one pair of polymer insulated conductors is insulated with a polymer foam. Analogous art, Rogers, discloses using polymer foam to prevent burning [abstract]. MPEP 2144.05 states Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized foam polymer since it has been held to be within the ordinary skill of worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARAH N TAUFIQ whose telephone number is (571)272-6765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8:00 am-4:30 pm.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571)270-1487. 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.
/FARAH TAUFIQ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights