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 .
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.
Claims 1, 3-16, 18-19, 22-23 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujii (US 2003/0199185 A1) in view of Kamimura (US 2020/0335909 A1) and Okabe (US 5848912).
Regarding claim 1: Fujii (Figures 10-13) teaches a connector assembly comprising:
a base connector (i.e. 10) having a locking protrusion (i.e. 18);
a body connector (i.e. 20 and 30) being insertable into the base connector;
a main lever (i.e. 40) configured to be rotatably coupled to the body connector (i.e. specifically 20);
a locking lever (i.e. 48) formed on the main lever (i.e. 40) and being engageable with the locking protrusion (i.e. paragraph [0050] describes, “the lock arm 48 has a lock hole 49 and is engageable with a hook 18” in lines 5-6);
but does not specifically teach
the locking protrusion formed on an outer circumferential surface;
a position assurance slider disposed to engage with the locking lever to be slidable with respect to the locking lever and preventing separation of the locking lever engaged with the locking protrusion;
and
a compression spring disposed between the position assurance slider and the locking lever, and capable of pressing the position assurance slider, wherein the position assurance slider is slidable with respect to the locking lever in a first direction pressed by the compression spring and in a second direction opposite to the first direction.
However, Kamimura (Figure 4) teaches
a locking protrusion (i.e. 23 and 24) formed on an outer circumferential surface (i.e. outer circumferential surface of housing 2);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the locking protrusion as taught by Fujii to be formed on the outer circumferential surface as taught by Kamimura. This design choice provides a visual indication that the locking lever and locking protruding portion are properly engaged.
Okabe (Figure 3) teaches
a position assurance slider (i.e. 10) disposed to engage with the locking lever (i.e. 8) to be slidable with respect to the locking lever and preventing separation of the locking lever engaged with the locking protrusion (i.e. 25); and
a compression spring (i.e. 9) disposed between the position assurance slider and the locking lever (i.e. between rear of 10 and 8), and capable of pressing the position assurance slider, wherein the position assurance slider is slidable with respect to the locking lever in a first direction pressed by the compression spring and in a second direction opposite to the first direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the main lever of the connector assembly taught by Fujii to have the position assurance slider and locking lever taught by Okabe in order to prevent incorrect coupling of the body and base connector when operating the main lever.
Regarding claim 3: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 1. Kamimura teaches wherein the main lever (i.e. main lever of claim 1) comprises a housing (i.e. 5) for accommodating the locking lever (i.e. 53) and the position assurance slider (i.e. 8), and the housing selectively contacting with the position assurance slider (i.e. as in the states of figures 11 and 13).
Regarding claim 4: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 3, Kamimura (Figures 1-14) further teaches wherein the housing comprises a guide groove (i.e. guide rail 523) guiding movement of the position assurance slider in a predetermined direction in a first state in which the housing is in contact with the position assurance slider (i.e. as in figure 12), or guiding the position assurance slider to move within a predetermined range in a second state in which the housing does not contact with the position assurance slider.
Regarding claim 5: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 4, Kamimura (Figures 5-6) further teaches wherein the position assurance slider comprises:
a slider body (i.e. 81) configured to engage with the locking lever;
an arm (i.e. 83) extending from one end of the slider body and preventing separation of the locking lever; and
a guide protrusion (i.e. 85) formed to protrude from both sides of the slider body and guiding movement of the position assurance slider by being accommodated in the guide groove.
Regarding claim 6: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 4, Kamimura (Figure 12) further teaches wherein the guide groove comprises a first guide (i.e. upper portion of 523) configured to move the position assurance slider in a predetermined direction, and a second guide (i.e. lower portion of 523) connected to one end of the first guide and having a wider width (i.e. space above the lower portion is wider) than the first guide.
Regarding claim 7: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 4, Kamimura (Figures 1-14) further teaches wherein the position assurance slider engages with the housing in the first state (i.e. state of figure 12), and
the position assurance slider is released with the housing in the second state (i.e. state of figure 14).
Regarding claim 8: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the assembly of claim 4, Kamimura (Figures 1-14) teaches wherein the position assurance slider comprises a second slider body groove (i.e. 81b) configured to engage with the housing in the first state (i.e. as in figure 12), and
the housing comprises a housing rib (i.e. 513a) capable of being accommodated in the second slider body groove (i.e. as in figure 12).
Regarding claim 9: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the assembly of claim 8, Kamimura (Figures 1-14) further teaches wherein the housing rib comprises a stopper (i.e. right end) limiting a range of movement of the position assurance slider (i.e. prevents upward movement).
Regarding claim 10: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 1. Okabe (Figure 7) further teaches wherein the locking lever comprises a locking lever opening (i.e. accepting 25) for accommodating the locking protrusion or engaging with the position assurance slider.
Regarding claim 11: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 1. Okabe (Figure 7) teaches wherein the locking lever comprises a locking lever rib (i.e. 7) configured to engage the position assurance slider, and
The position assurance slider comprises a first slider body groove (i.e. 13) accommodating the locking lever rib.
Regarding claim 12: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 4, Kamimura (Figures 1-14) further teaches wherein the locking lever comprises a main inclined surface (i.e. 53c) formed so that the position assurance slider is slidable from the first state to the second state.
Regarding claim 13: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 1, Okabe (Figure 7) further teaches wherein the position assurance slider is biased in the first direction by the compression spring to a first position wherein the position assurance slider prevents the locking lever from disengaging with the locking protrusion (i.e. as understood by figure 7).
Regarding claim 14: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 13, Okabe (Figures 6-7) further teaches wherein the position assurance slider is adapted to be moved in the second direction, compressing the compression spring against an elastic return force of the compression spring to a second position (i.e. position of figure 6) wherein the locking lever may be disengaged from the locking protrusion.
Regarding claim 15: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 1, Okabe (Figure 7) wherein the compression spring includes a first end engaging with the locking lever and a second end engaging with the position assurance slider, the second end moveable relative to the first end in the first direction and the second direction (i.e. as in figure 7).
Regarding claim 16: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 15, Okabe (Figure 7) further teaches wherein the locking lever defines a mounting element engaging with the first end of the spring (i.e. supporting 9).
Regarding claim 18: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teaches the connector assembly of claim 1, Okabe (Figure 7) further teaches wherein at least a portion of the compression spring is discrete from and moveable relative to the position assurance slider (i.e. as in figure 7).
Regarding claim 19: Fujii (Figures 10-13) teaches a connector assembly comprising:
a base connector (i.e. 10) having a locking protrusion (i.e. 18);
a body connector (i.e. 20 and 30) being insertable into the base connector;
a main lever (i.e. 40) configured to be rotatably coupled to the body connector (i.e. specifically 20);
a locking lever (i.e. 48) formed on the main lever and being engageable with the locking protrusion (i.e. paragraph [0050] describes, “the lock arm 48 has a lock hole 49 and is engageable with a hook 18” in lines 5-6);
wherein moving the position assurance slider into the second position form the first position includes compressing the compression spring.
but does not specifically teach
the locking protrusion formed on an outer circumferential surface.
a position assurance slider slidably mounted to the locking lever and movable between a first position, wherein the locking lever is prevented from disengaging with the locking protrusion, and a second position wherein the locking lever may be disengaged from the locking protrusion; and
a compression spring arranged between the position assurance slider and the locking lever, the spring moving the position assurance slider into the first position wherein the position assurance slider is arranged over the locking lever.
However, Okabe (Figures 6-9) teaches
a position assurance slider (i.e. 10) slidably mounted to the locking lever (i.e. 8) and movable between a first position (i.e. state of figure 9), wherein the locking lever is prevented from disengaging with the locking protrusion (i.e. 25), and a second position (i.e. state of figure 6) wherein the locking lever may be disengaged from the locking protrusion; and
a compression spring (i.e. 9) arranged between the position assurance slider (i.e. rear of 10 and 8) and the locking lever, the spring moving the position assurance slider into the first position wherein the position assurance slider is arranged over the locking lever.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly taught by Fujii to have a position assurance slider as taught by Okabe in order to ensure the assembly is properly connected.
Furthermore, Kamimura (Figure 1) teaches a locking protrusion (i.e. 24) formed on an outer circumferential surface (i.e. surface of 2);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly taught by Fujii and Okabe to have the protrusion formed on an outer circumferential surface to provide a visual indication that the assembly is properly connected.
Regarding claim 22: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 1, Okabe (Figure 3) further teaches wherein the locking lever includes a cylinder (i.e. 9 mounted on cylinder in figure 3) on which the compression spring is mounted.
Regarding claim 23: Fujii, Kamimura, and Okabe teach the connector assembly of claim 1, Okabe further teaches wherein the compression spring continuously pressures the positions assurance slider in the first direction (i.e. as understood from the state of figure 9).
Claims 1 and 24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujii, Kamimura, and Yamaoka (US 2005/0153594 A1).
Regarding claim 1: Fujii (Figures 10-13) teaches a connector assembly comprising:
a base connector (i.e. 10) having a locking protrusion (i.e. 18);
a body connector (i.e. 20 and 30) being insertable into the base connector;
a main lever (i.e. 40) configured to be rotatably coupled to the body connector (i.e. specifically 20);
a locking lever (i.e. 48) formed on the main lever (i.e. 40) and being engageable with the locking protrusion (i.e. paragraph [0050] describes, “the lock arm 48 has a lock hole 49 and is engageable with a hook 18” in lines 5-6);
but does not specifically teach
the locking protrusion formed on an outer circumferential surface;
a position assurance slider disposed to engage with the locking lever to be slidable with respect to the locking lever and preventing separation of the locking lever engaged with the locking protrusion;
and
a compression spring disposed between the position assurance slider and the locking lever, and capable of pressing the position assurance slider, wherein the position assurance slider is slidable with respect to the locking lever in a first direction pressed by the compression spring and in a second direction opposite to the first direction.
However, Kamimura (Figure 4) teaches
a locking protrusion (i.e. 23 and 24) formed on an outer circumferential surface (i.e. outer circumferential surface of housing 2);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the locking protrusion as taught by Fujii to be formed on the outer circumferential surface as taught by Kamimura so as to save more space within the connector for electric components.
Yamaoka (Figure 9) teaches
a position assurance slider (i.e. 48) disposed to engage with the locking lever (i.e. 30) to be slidable with respect to the locking lever and preventing separation of the locking lever engaged with the locking protrusion (i.e. 15); and
a compression spring (i.e. 45) disposed between the position assurance slider and the locking lever, and capable of pressing the position assurance slider, wherein the position assurance slider is slidable with respect to the locking lever in a first direction pressed by the compression spring and in a second direction opposite to the first direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the main lever of the connector assembly taught by Fujii to have the position assurance slider and locking lever taught by Yamaoka in order to prevent incorrect coupling of the body and base connector when operating the main lever.
Regarding claim 24: Fujii, Kamimura, and Yamaoka teach the connector assembly of claim 1, Yamaoka (Figure 13) further teaches wherein the locking lever comprises a locking lever opening (i.e. 32) for accommodating the locking protrusion (i.e. as in figure 13) or engaging with the position assurance slider, the compression spring is above the locking lever opening (i.e. as in figure 13).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Regaridng claims 1 and 19, applicant argues that Okabe does not teach a compression spring arranged between the position assurance slider and the locking lever. In this and the previous action, Okabe is cited as teaching a compression spring arranged between the rear of 10 and 8. A marked version of figure 7 of Okabe below points to the compression spring being arranged between the position assurance slider and the locking lever. Therefore, Okabe continues to teach a compression spring arranged between the position assurance slider and the locking lever.
PNG
media_image1.png
643
882
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 22, applicant argues that Okabe does not describe the components 8 and 6 as cited in this and the previous action. Whether Okabe describes 6 including 8 or 8 including 6 does not impact the citation of figure 3 in the rejection of claim 22. To be used as prior art, “the picture must show all the claimed structural features and how they are put together,” Jockmus v. Leviton, 28 F.2d 812 (2d Cir. 1928), figure 3 clearly shows a locking lever, a compression spring, and the compression spring mounted on a cylinder of the locking lever; “it does not matter that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained in the specification.” In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979), Okabe does not need to describe the cylinder as a part of the locking lever for the feature to be apparent in figure 3; “the drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art,” In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979), when the examiner cites the cylinder of figure 3 as a part of the locking lever, one of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised to determine which unclaimed body components of the locking lever may intervene the cylinder and the front of the locking lever.
Applicant has only argued that Okabe does not describe in his specification that the cylinder is a part of the locking lever as cited. There is no argument or suggestion that any structure cited in figure 3 is physically different than that which is claimed or that any cited component is incapable of performing the claimed functions.
Furthermore, because each of applicant and Okabe may be their own lexicographer, it would naturally follow that applicant and Okabe may discuss like components differently. However, when applicant points to elements 6 “the lock arm” and 8 “the arm portion” of Okabe in these arguments, applicant affirms that a person having ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised by the citation in claim 22 as to which components form the locking lever includes a cylinder on which the compression spring is mounted, and there is no argument presented that differentiates these structures from the claimed invention.
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 GREGORY MANGOT whose telephone number is 703-756-5737. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm ET.
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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at 571-272-3560. 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 addition 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.
/GREGORY L MANGOT/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights