Wissenschaft Forschung Solaranlage

Mercury Cable and Energy ("Mercury Cable") is pleased to announce that the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") has issued a second office action on Mercury Cable's Request for Ex Parte Reexamination of the Composite Technology Corporation (OTCBB:CPTC.OB) ACCC patent for bare overhead transmission wire U.S. Patent No. 7,368,162 (the "162 patent"). In the office action, the patent examiner rejected all 36 claims contained in the 162 Patent as unpatentable.

On July 18, 2009: A compliant Request for Ex Parte Reexamination was filed for claims 1-36 of U.S. Patent No. 7,368,162.

On August 17, 2009: An Order granting Ex Parte Reexamination for claims 1-36 was mailed.

On September 10, 2009, Patent Owner filed a written waiver to the filing of a Patent Owner's Statement under 37 C.F.R. 1.530.

In the Office Action dated November 19, 2009, the Patent Examiner stated, "The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action":

In its conclusion, the Patent Examiner stated: "Claims 1-8, 10-17, 19-21,23-27,29-34 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over U.S. 6,015,953 (Tosaka) in view of U.S. 5,093:162 (Fenton). In the Examiner?s final conclusion, contained on page 19 of the Office Action, Claims 1-36 are rejected.

In his analysis, the Patent Examiner states: "Tosaka is analogous prior art because it is directed to an electricity transmission cable and is therefore in the same 'field of endeavor' as the 162 patent (patent under reexamination). Fenton is analogous art, because although it is directed to a golf club shaft, it discloses adjusting the shaft stiffness without altering the torsion stiffness by altering the ratio of fiberglass to carbon-graphite fibers, which is exactly the same problem identified and solved in the 162 patent. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the teachings of Fenton and Tosaka to have electrical transmission cable comprising a core of reinforcing fibers of a first type of having a tensile strength that exceeds the tensile strength of glass fibers and an outer core of a second type that has a tensile strength similar to glass fibers, since it is merely the application of a known technique to solve a known problem with an expectation of predictable results. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395~97 (2007)."

CTC now has until December 4^th (319 patent) and December 19^th (162 patent) to respond to the examiner and attempt to overcome the rejections. To view the office action on both the 162 and 319 patent re-examinations please visit the USPTO website or the newsroom at www.mercurycable.com.

Mercury Cable will continue to pursue a worldwide Intellectual Property strategy which includes challenging overly broad claims of its competitors and will assert its rights to manufacture and sell its proprietary, industry leading HVCRC composite core conductors globally.

Mercury Cable & Energy is a privately?held developer of High Voltage Composite Reinforced Conductors (HVCRC), Smart Conductors for the Smart Grid. The patented HVCRC Smart Conductor is superior to existing conductors in a number of key performance areas including:

• Up to double the current carrying capacity of ACSR
• Substantially reduces high-temperature sag
• Requires fewer structures for new line construction
• Increases capacity of existing rights?of?way and structures through retrofitting
• Eliminates bi-metallic corrosion
• Significantly reduces line losses compared to same?diameter conventional and composite conductors at equal operating temperatures