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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on June 29, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2 and 4-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Independent claims 1 and 10 both recite that the opening in the second surface is arranged “such that the conduit is pulled taut and the opening prevents the conduit from being caught between the arm and the bracket when the arm is pivoted” between two positions. There is no description in the specification that provides for how the opening prevents the conduit from being pinched when the arm pivots. Similarly, there is no description of how the conduit is pulled taut. The only recitation in the written description related to the openings and keeping the conduit taut is found at ¶0074 of the published application. That paragraph, however, does not provide for any structures or structural arrangement that somehow causes the conduit to be held taut so as to not be caught or snagged between the facewise mating surfaces 212/314 when the joint is moved from the in-use first position in Fig. 17 to the pivoted second position in Fig. 16. Indeed, the specification only recites that the conduit is provided with sufficient slack (see ¶0090 and ¶0104) to allow for this pivoting without breaking the conduit, but these is no description of how the conduit is held taut in order to prevent the exposed slack found between the surfaces 212/314 in Fig. 16 to be pulled back into the arm or how the opening’s shape, size, or alignment (as provided in the claims) causes the conduit to be pulled taut.
Claims 2, 4-9, and 11-21 are rejected as being dependent on claims 1 and 10.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the opening in the second surface being aligned with the conduit connector such that the conduit is pulled taut and the opening prevents the conduit being caught between the arm and bracket when the arm is pivoted (see above §112 rejection) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmalriede et al. (US 2021/0162930) in view of Werth et al. (8,471,917) and Fu et al. (CN 110758252, see attached machine translation).
Regarding claims 1 (as best understood), 2, 5, 7, and 21, Schmalriede discloses a connecting assembly for connecting sensors in a sensor pod (100) to a vehicle, the connecting assembly comprising:
a conduit connector (see ¶0030 describing the that the sensor 12 is an add-on part, implicit to this sensor being added onto the retaining device is that a conduit terminates at and connects via a connector) located at a housing (see ¶0044 describing how a removable housing is used to cover the sensor) of the sensor pod;
an arm (30, see Figs. 1 and 2) pivotally connected (at 28) to the vehicle via a bracket (16, 24), the housing of the sensor pod connected to the arm (see ¶0044),
a conduit (e.g., the data and power cables running between the vehicle and the sensor(s), see ¶0039) configured to connect with the conduit connector and extending from the conduit connector to the vehicle through the arm (e.g., through channel 46 in arm 30) while passing through openings from the bracket (16 to the end of the arm 30; see Fig. 1); and
a conduit connector point located at a connection between the conduit connector and the conduit (implicit).
While Schmalriede discloses that the arm-mounted sensor is connected to the vehicle via conduits, it does not explicitly disclose how the sensor is connected upon this external support/arm or that the conduit passes through aligned facing surfaces within like-sized openings in the arm that hold the conduit taut in different positions.
Werth teaches another connecting assembly for connecting a sensor (16) in a sensor pod (e.g., the external housing shown in Fig. 3) to a vehicle comprising:
a conduit connector (38) located on the sensor pod housing (see Fig. 3);
an arm (e.g., arm-mounted support 32, see Figs. 2 and 3), the housing of the sensor pod connected to the arm (see Fig. 3), wherein the conduit connector 38) extends through a surface of the arm (see Col. 3, lines 61-63);
a conduit connector point (42) located at a connection between the conduit connector (38) and a conduit (44) that runs through a cavity in the arm (32, see Fig. 3 showing a coiled/slack amount of conduit 44 disposed in the cavity of the support 32).
Fu teaches another external electronic vehicle including a multi-position arm assembly (9, see Fig. 1) where openings (at 8) sized to substantially the same as the conduit/wire (1/2; see Fig. 1) within the arm (9) and supporting base (3) are aligned such that the conduit/wire (1/2) for an external sensor (camera 13) is pulled taut (via spooler 20) to take-up any slack in the conduit/wire (1/2) from the change in position of the movable mirror arm.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the sensor pod connecting assembly of Schmalriede to use a conduit connector that is insertingly mated to its support arm as taught by Werth and to have the conduit pass through like-sized holes and to use an internal take-up system to keep the internal conduits taut within the movable arm as taught by Fu to arrive at the claimed device with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be provide a secure interconnection between a sensor and it support while still permitting free movement of the movable arm.
Regarding claims 4, 10 (as best understood), 11-12, 14, and 16-19, Schmalriede further discloses that the conduit (cable) comprises a length of slack such that the conduit is configured to stay connected to the conduit connector point when the sensor pod is rotated between a first closer position and a second further position (see pivots 26 and 28 and cable guide 36; i.e., implicit to the sensor 12 being pivotable while being tethered to a conduit is that the conduit has to have sufficient slack to allow for the movement about the pivot point as the sensor’s pod moves closer and further from the vehicle. This length will naturally be at least long enough to allow the pivoting pod to extend as far away the furthest intended pivot position).
Further, Fu from the above combination includes additional slack conduit (1/2) wrapped around the take-up spool (20) that is kept within the assembly to allow for the mirror assembly to change position.
Regarding claims 6 and 13, as discussed above, Schmalriede discloses that the assembly includes a removable housing (see ¶0044) whose removal grants access to the sensor (12) and the arm’s conduit channel (46, see Fig. 1).
Further, the Werth cavity containing the conduit connector (38) and conduit (44) connection point (42) is closed by removing the housing (27/32, see Figs. 2-3) from the cavity closing exterior/cover (14).
Regarding claims 8 and 15, while Schmalriede does not explicitly recite that a removed first sensor pod can be replaced with a different pod, one skilled in the relevant art would readily appreciate that commercially-available vehicle sub-component can be readily replaced with an identical replacement version. The motivation being to allow for repair and replacement of broken or damaged pods.
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmalriede in view of Werth and Fu as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Secanu (6,533,424).
Regarding claims 9 and 20, the Schmalriede combination does not disclose whether the conduit will break before the connection separates.
Secanu teaches another vehicle-mounted accessory supplying electrical power to electrical consumer’s (see Fig. 1) via a wire harness/conduit (11/8) that connects to a conduit connector (9/12). The conduit connector point (i.e.., where 8 and 9 mate, such as 17/13 in Fig. 3) supplies the electrical connection between the consumer and the vehicle (see e.g., Fig. 3). As described at Col. 3, lines 25-37, pivoting of the mirror beyond a threshold results in the two connector ends 8/9 to be disconnected. Inherent to this automatic disconnection is that the conduit connector point (8/9, see Fig. 4-7) will disconnect before the rest of the conduit breaks. This is evidenced by the fact that the disconnected elements can be reconnected (see Col. 3, lines 39-57).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the assembly of the Schmalriede combination to use a re-usable disconnection between the conduit and an electrical consumer’s connector as taught by Secanu to arrive at the claimed device with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be provide a reusable electrical connection that allows for ready disconnection for repair or replacement and for allowing for the ready addition and removal of additional add-on sensors, such as sensor 38 in Schmalriede.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, last full paragraph, of the Amendment and response filed August 18, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 10 under §103 as being unpatentable over Schmalriede in view of Werth have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration afforded by the Request for Continued Examination filed June 29, 2026, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the teachings of the Chinese Fu reference which provides for the tensioning of a movable vehicle mirror to keep the unit's conduit slack from interfering with the movement.
Further, a review of the instant claims in light of the specification disclosure found that the claim language introduced in the amendments made in the After-Final submission of August 18, 2025 are not supported by the written description as there is no description of how the aligned opening(s) cause the conduit to be taut so as to avoid the slack interfering with the movement of the arm.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVE CLEMMONS whose telephone number is (313)446-4842. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-4:30 EST Monday-Friday.
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, J Allen Shriver can be reached on 303-297-4337. 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.
/STEVE CLEMMONS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights