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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5 and 7-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Arantes (US 5,512,726).
Regarding claim 1, Arantes teaches a connector assembly (combination of 12, 46, 57 and 55) for a robotic welding system (Fig. 1), comprising: an adapter plate (12, 55) configured to mount to a robotic welder (40) of the robotic welding system (as shown in Fig. 1 and 2); a feeder plate (46), the feeder plate configured to couple to a wire feeder (9, 10, 11) of the robotic welding system (thru the end piece 12 and arm 3); and a clamping plate (57) mounted to the adapter plate (as shown in Fig. 2) and configured to clamp the feeder plate to the adapter plate when at least a portion of the feeder plate is disposed between the clamping plate and the adapter plate (as shown in Fig. 2; Column 4, lines 2-21), wherein the feeder plate defines a clamping zone (periphery of plate 46) wherein the feeder plate can be positioned and clamped in place with the clamping plate in any location within the clamping zone (as shown in Fig. 2; Column 4, lines 2-21; each clip 56 comprising clamping plate 57 positions and clamps in place each pin 53 of plate 46 in any location, left, right, front and back).
Regarding claim 3, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 1, wherein the feeder plate comprises a plurality of mounting flanges (flanges of plate 46 where electrical plug 51 and wire guide mouthpiece 52 are located) for mounting the feeder plate to the wire feeder (as shown in Fig. 2 and 3; Column 4, lines 27-33).
Regarding claim 4, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 3, wherein the clamping zone comprises an area bounded by the plurality of mounting flanges, a front end of the feeder plate, and a back end of the feeder plate (as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 1, wherein the feeder plate comprises a slot longitudinally from a front end and through the clamping zone (as shown in Fig. 2 below).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (slot)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
713
531
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 1, further comprising a locking mechanism (58) configured to prevent the feeder plate from sliding off the adapter plate (Column 4, lines 2-21).
Regarding claim 8, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 7, wherein the locking mechanism comprises a lock housing (58) mounted to the adapter plate and a catch plate (59 and 60) disposed in the lock housing (as shown in Fig. 2), the catch plate being biased towards the feeder plate (Column 4, lines 14-21).
Regarding claim 9, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 8, wherein the locking mechanism further comprises a protrusion (53, 54) extending from a mounting flange (periphery of plate 46) of the feeder plate, and the catch plate further comprises a slot (slot below 59) configured to receive the protrusion (Column 4, lines 14-21).
Regarding claim 10, Arantes teach a connector assembly (combination of 12, 46, 57 and 55) for a welding system (Fig. 1), comprising: a first plate (12, 55) configured to be mounted to a first device (40) of the welding system (as shown in Fig. 1 and 2);
a clamping plate (57) operatively coupled to the first plate for applying a clamping force toward the first plate (Column 4, lines 2-21); and a second plate (46) configured to be mounted to a second device (9, 10, 11) of the welding system (thru the end piece 12 and arm 3), the second plate being configured to slide between the first plate and the clamping plate (as shown in Fig. 2, the body of plate 46 is slide within a central compartment of frame 55, and therefore disposed between the left and right sides of 57 and 55; also, the back portion of plate 46 where pin 53 is located is also disposed between 55 and 57), the second plate defines a clamping zone (periphery of plate 46), the second plate can be placed in different positions and clamped in place in those different positions with the clamping plate within the clamping zone (as shown in Fig. 2, each clip 56 comprising clamping plate 57 clamps in place each pin 53 of plate 46 in different positions, left, right, front and back), wherein the second plate is secured to the first plate when at least a portion of the second plate is disposed between the first plate and the clamping plate (as shown in Fig. 2, the body of plate 46 is slide within a central compartment of frame 55, and therefore disposed between the left and right sides of 57 and 55; also, the back portion of plate 46 were pin 53 is located is also disposed between 55 and 57) and the clamping plate applies the clamping force on the second plate (Column 4, lines 14-21).
Regarding claim 11, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 10, wherein the clamping zone is configured to receive the clamping force (Column 4, lines 14-21), wherein the clamping zone is larger than the clamping plate (as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 10, further comprising a locking mechanism (58) configured to prevent the second plate from sliding off the first plate (Column 4, lines 2-21).
Regarding claim 13, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 12, wherein the locking mechanism comprises a lock housing (58) mounted to the first plate and a catch plate (59 and 60) disposed in the lock housing (as shown in Fig. 2), the catch plate being biased towards the second plate (Column 4, lines 14-21).
Regarding claim 14, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 13, wherein: the second plate further comprises a mounting flange (flanges of plate 46 where pins 53 and 54 are disposed) extending perpendicularly from the second plate (as shown in Fig. 2), and a protrusion (53, 54) extending perpendicularly from the mounting flange (as shown in Fig. 2); and the catch plate further comprises a slot (slot below 59) configured to receive the protrusion (Column 4, lines 14-21).
Regarding claim 15, Arantes teaches the connector assembly of claim 10, wherein the first device is a robotic welder (40; as shown in Fig. 2), and the second device is a wire feeder (9, 10, 11; as shown in Fig. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 21-26 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: allowable subject matter is indicated for claims 6 and 21-26 because the prior art of record does not show or fairly suggest a connector assembly comprising a clamping bolt extending through the adapter plate, the slot, and the clamping plate, wherein the clamping bolt is configured to pull the clamping plate towards the adapter plate as recited in claims 6 and 21.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/31/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues that “Applicant notes that Arantes discloses the bosses 59 as being located at a single location as shown above. Arantes fails to teach or suggest that "the feeder plate can be positioned and clamped in place with the clamping plate in any location within the clamping zone" (emphasis added). Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that Arantes fails to teach or suggest the features recited in claim 1, and requests that the rejection of claim 1 be withdrawn… As set forth above, Arantes discloses the bosses 59 as being located at a single location. Applicant submits that Arantes fails to teach or suggest that "the second plate can be placed in different positions and clamped in place in those different positions with the clamping plate within the clamping zone" (emphasis added). Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that Arantes fails to anticipate the features recited in claim 10, and requests that the rejection thereof be withdrawn.” on remarks page 7, lines 17-21 and page 8, lines 5-10. In response to Applicant’s arguments, Arantes teaches wherein the feeder plate defines a clamping zone (periphery of plate 46) wherein the feeder plate can be positioned and clamped in place with the clamping plate in any location within the clamping zone (as shown in Fig. 2; Column 4, lines 2-21; each clip 56 comprising clamping plate 57 positions and clamps in place each pin 53 of plate 46 in any location, left, right, front and back); and wherein the second plate (46) defines a clamping zone (periphery of plate 46), the second plate can be placed in different positions and clamped in place in those different positions with the clamping plate within the clamping zone (as shown in Fig. 2, each clip 56 comprising clamping plate 57 clamps in place each pin 53 of plate 46 in different positions, left, right, front and back).
For these reasons, the arguments are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 3-15, Applicant relies on the same arguments, therefore, the same response applies.
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 ALBA T ROSARIO-APONTE whose telephone number is (571)272-9325. The examiner can normally be reached M to F; 8am-5pm.
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5095. 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.
/ALBA T ROSARIO-APONTE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 04/01/2026
/JUSTIN C DODSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761