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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-21 in the reply filed on 10/3/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim 22 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/3/2025.
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 1-11 and 17 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.
As to claim 1, “said arms” in line 5 should be “said first arms” and “said arms” in line 8 should be “said second arms” in order to not confuse the different arms.
Regarding claim 2, line 2 uses singular language for first arm and second arm while it is previously used plurally. Thus, it is unclear which arm is being referred to. Additionally, line 3 recites, “said slot” and it is unclear which slot is being referred to. Finally, line 4 recites, “said connector”, which creates an antecedent basis issue because it is referred to as a connector system in claim 1.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the slot" in 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which slot is being referred to.
Regarding claim 9, line 2 uses singular language for first arm and second arm while it is previously used plurally. Thus, it is unclear which arm is being referred to. Additionally, line 3 recites, “said slot” and it is unclear which slot is being referred to. Finally, line 4 recites, “said connector”, which creates an antecedent basis issue because it is referred to as a connector system in claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, line 2 uses singular language for first arm and second arm while it is previously used plurally. Thus, it is unclear which arm is being referred to. Additionally, line 4 recites, “said connector”, which creates an antecedent basis issue because it is referred to as a connector system in claim 1.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the connector" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunter (U.S. Patent Publication 2006/0176639) in view of Hardy (U.S. Patent Publication 7361065).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Hunter discloses an electrical connector comprising: two sprung latches 56 located on either side of a tongue 46 and co-operating with gaps 14 in socket walls 6 to provide quick release locking means; a tongue portion 40 including a base 42 that contains a clamp 44 for securing a webbing strap and a connector made from a resilient material (Paragraphs 0001, 0037, 0098, 0103; and Figs. 1A-1B, 2A-2B). As to claim 2, Hunter teaches socket lobes 58 extending through gaps 14 in socket walls to hold a tongue 46 within a socket 7, and two sprung latches 56 located on either side of the tongue 46 (Paragraphs 0103-0104). Regarding claim 3, Hunter discloses sprung latches 56 made from a resilient plastic that provides a spring action of the two sprung latches in use, wherein the latches are biased to a wide position so that lobes 58 extend through gaps 14 in socket walls (Paragraph 0104). As to claim 4, Hunter teaches sprung latches 56 biased to a wide position so that lobes 58 extend through gaps 14 in socket wall, and a longitudinal axis extending between the latch and a base 42 (Paragraph 0104). Regarding claim 5, Hunter discloses sprung latches 56 biased to a wide position so that lobes 58 extend through gaps 14 in socket walls, a tongue portion 40 including a base 42 that contains a clamp 44 for securing a webbing strap, and the base including a second arm (Paragraphs 0098, 0104). As to claim 6, Hunter teaches a tongue portion including a base that contains a clamp for securing a webbing strap, and the base includes a second arm (Paragraph 0098). Regarding claims 7 and 8, Hunter discloses sprung latches 56 biased to a wide position so that when the tongue 46 is engaged in the socket, lobes 58 extend through gaps 14 in the socket walls to hold the tongue within a socket 7 (Paragraph 0104). As to claims 9 and 10, Hunter teaches socket lobes 58 extending through gaps 14 in socket walls to hold a tongue 46 within a socket 7, and sprung latches 56 located on either side of the tongue, biased to a wide position so that when the tongue is engaged in the socket, the lobes extend through the gaps in the socket walls to hold the tongue within the socket (Paragraphs 0103-0104). Regarding claim 11, Hunter discloses two sprung latches 56 located on either side of a tongue 46 and co-operating with gaps 14 in socket walls 6 to provide quick release locking means, a tongue portion 40 including a base 42 that contains a clamp 44 for securing a webbing strap, and the base including a second arm (Paragraphs 0098, 0103). As to claims 13 and 14, Hunter teaches deforming sprung latches 56 made from resilient plastic that suitably provides spring action of the two latches in use, wherein the latches are biased to a wide position so that lobes 58 extend through gaps 14 in socket walls (Paragraph 0104). Regarding claims 15 and 16, Fig. 2A shows that deforming the first or second arms comprises deforming center arms into a groove. As to claims 17 and 18, Hunter teaches sprung latches 56 biased to a wide position so that when the tongue 46 is engaged in the socket, lobes 58 extend through gaps 14 in the socket walls to hold the tongue within the socket 7, and two sprung latches located on either side of the tongue and co-operating with gaps in socket walls to provide quick release locking means (Paragraphs 0103 and 0104). Regarding claims 19, Hunter discloses sprung latches 56 made from a resilient plastic that suitably provides a spring action of the two latches in use, wherein the latches are biased to a wide position so that lobes extend through gaps in socket walls (Paragraph 0104). As to claims 20 and 21, Hunter teaches sprung latches 56 made from a resilient plastic that suitably provides a spring action of the two latches in use, wherein the latches are biased to a wide position so that lobes extend through gaps in socket walls, a tongue portion includes a base that contains a clamp for securing a webbing strap, the base includes a second arm (Paragraphs 0098, 0104).
Hunter fails to disclose that the connector is for connecting a fuel cell plate to an electrical device.
Regarding claims 1, 7-12, 17 and 18, Hardy discloses a connector assembly 100 coupled to a plate 104 of a fuel cell system, wherein the connector assembly comprises a center contact beam 152 including a contact surface 172 which engages a surface of the plate contact 118, wherein an oblique angle of the beam generates a normal contact force against the plate contact, as the beam is engaged to the plate contact and the beam is deflected (Col. 5, lines 59-67, and Figs. 1-3, 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention that the connector assembly of Hunter could be used to connect a fuel cell to an electrical device because Hardy shows that connectors having similar structures are used to connect fuel cells to electrical devices.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY L RAYMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-6545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am-6 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
BRITTANY L. RAYMOND
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1722
/BRITTANY L RAYMOND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722