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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendment filed April 20, 2026. Claims 1-16 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Objections to claims 3 and 8 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot in view of the rejection(s) below.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claims 1 and 15: Although the prior art (JP 62-15784) teaches a plug for an electronic plucked string instrument shown in Fig. 7 to be attached to an end of a cable (43) connecting to a music sound output terminal of the electronic plucked string instrument, the plug comprising: a plug main body (1) shown in Fig. 1 to be formed into such a shape as to engage with a musical instrument side jack forming a music sound output terminal; an attachment sleeve (15) formed into a cylindrical shape as to be open in both ends in an axial direction, is coupled with a rear end side of the plug main body, and allows a leading end portion of the cable to be inserted in the axial direction from a rear end side opening to an inner side; and a set screw (19) screwed into a peripheral wall portion of the attachment sleeve in such a manner that a leading end comes into contact with an outer sheath of the cable while passing through the attachment sleeve in a radial direction, and clamps the cable with respect to a peripheral wall portion of the cable on the basis of a screwing compression force caused by the screwing as shown in Fig. 7, wherein a portion (18) engaging the outer sheath while receiving the screwing compression force of the set screw via the cable is integrally formed on an inner peripheral surface of the attachment sleeve along a peripheral direction of the inner peripheral surface, the prior art does not teach nor suggest the attachment sleeve to be integrated with the rear end side of the plug main body and the portion engaging the outer sheave to be a biting convex portion biting into the outer sheath while receiving the screwing compression force of the set screw. The combinations of the claimed limitations are novel and found to be allowable over prior art. The cited references taken singly or in combination do not anticipate nor make obvious applicant's claimed invention.
Claims 2-14 and 16 depend from claims 1 or 15 and therefore inherit all allowed claim limitations.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,555,961 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the scope of the Patent Claim 8, and Claim 1 from which Claim 8 depends, falls within the scope of the examined claim, with the exception of limitations pertaining to a set screw and biting convex portion. However a set screw is disclosed in the Patent screwed into a peripheral wall portion of the attachment sleeve in such a manner that a leading end comes into contact with an outer sheath of the cable while passing through the attachment sleeve in a radial direction and clamps the cable with respect to a peripheral wall portion of the cable on the basis of a screwing compression force caused by the screwing (column 9 line 64 through column 10 line 8). Further, a biting convex portion is disclosed in the Patent biting into the outer sheath while receiving the screwing compression force of the set screw via the cable being integrally formed on an inner peripheral surface of the attachment sleeve along a peripheral direction of the inner peripheral surface (column 19 lines 45-53). See also FIGS. 5, 7 and 11 of the examined application and FIGS. 3, 4 and 6 of the Patent, respectively. Providing such features in the Patented claims would provide “sufficient screw fastening force between a plug main body and a plug cover … and in which a screw fastening state of the plug cover is hard to slack even if an external force is repeatedly applied to a cable” as described in the Patent (column 2 lines 47-52).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER UHLIR whose telephone number is (571)270-3091. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/Christopher Uhlir/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 June 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights