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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3) because section lines in drawings should refer to the view number of the sectional view where it is shown. Figure 8a should have section line 8b–8b.
The drawings are objected to because they have elements shown in cross section which are not properly crosshatched. Insulating members shown in cross section should be properly crosshatched. See for example housing 52. It is brought to applicant’s attention that the conventional crosshatch for insulating members shown in cross section consist of lines of two different thicknesses alternatively disposed.
PNG
media_image1.png
35
156
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Although these changes are usually subjective to the examiner, it is noted that the Office still requires changes concerning drawings and particularly proper crosshatch of elements. Additionally, proper illustration of the presented example provided a clear visualization and understanding of the present invention.
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 § 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 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Paradis (US 4,909,754).
Regarding claim 16, Paradis discloses an insulation displacement terminal comprising: a first portion comprising a first beam (20) and a second beam (20), wherein a first slot (22) is formed by a first central edge of the first beam and a second central edge of the second beam; a second portion comprising a third beam (40, 42), a fourth beam (44), and a fifth beam (40, 42), wherein the fourth beam is configured as a cantilever beam with an attached lower end and a distal end separated from the third beam by a second slot (between 44 and 42) between the third beam and the fourth beam, and from the fifth beam (intended use) by a third slot (between 42 and 44) defined between the fourth beam and the fifth beam; and a press-fit pin (30) attached to an edge of the distal end of the fourth beam; wherein the press-fit pin is substantially narrower than the fourth beam (Fig. 4), the press fit pin (30) positioned on an opposing side (bottom) of the second slot and the third slot from the first portion (top of Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 17, Paradis discloses each of the third beam and the fifth beam are each cantilever beams with an attached lower end and terminal ends opposite from the attached lower end, and wherein the terminal ends of the third beam and the fifth beam are aligned with one-another and with the distal end of the fourth beam (in at least a diagonal direction).
Regarding claim 18, Paradis discloses the slot configured to receive and retain a lead (at 22) of an electrical component and to provide an electrical connection between the lead and a hole (at 52) receiving the press-fit pin (intended use).
Regarding claim 19, Paradis discloses that the second portion (at 40) is wider than the first portion.
Regarding claim 20, Paradis discloses that the distal end of the fourth beam (at 44) wider than the attached lower end of the fourth beam.
Claims 22, 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lybrand et al. (US 10,276,955).
Regarding claim 22, Lybrand discloses an insulation displacement terminal configured to be operably coupled with a housing (intended use), the insulation displacement terminal comprising: a first portion comprising a first beam (140) and a second beam (140), wherein a first slot (115) is formed by a first central edge of the first beam and a second central edge of the second beam; a second portion comprising a third beam (120), a fourth beam (above 110), and a fifth beam (120), wherein the fourth beam is configured as a cantilever beam with an attached lower end and a distal end that is able to move relative the third beam and the fifth beam (intended use), wherein the distal end defines an edge (side line above 130) extending perpendicular to the first slot, wherein the edge is positioned outwardly (away from) of a first terminal support feature and a second terminal support feature (under 120, Fig.4) defined by the housing, and wherein the fourth beam has a width that is less than a distance between the first and second terminal support features; and a press-fit pin (130) extending perpendicularly from the edge of the distal end of the fourth beam.
Regarding claim 25, Lybrand discloses each of the third beam and the fifth beam being cantilever beams with an attached lower end and terminal ends opposite from the attached lower end, and wherein the terminal ends of the third beam and the fifth beam are aligned with one-another and with the distal end of the fourth beam (at least on a plane).
Regarding claim 26, Lybrand discloses the slot configured to receive and retain a lead of an electrical component and to provide an electrical connection between the lead and a hole receiving the press-fit pin.
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 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lybrand et al. (US 10,276,955) in view of Klein et al. (US 7,815,439).
Regarding claim 1, Lybrand discloses an insulation displacement terminal comprising: a first portion extending along a plane and comprising a first beam (140) and a second beam (140), wherein a first slot (115) is formed by a first central edge of the first beam and a second central edge of the second beam; a second portion extending along the plane with the first portion (see Fig. 1) and comprising a third beam (120), a fourth beam (110), and a fifth beam (120), wherein the fourth beam is configured as a cantilever beam with an attached lower end and an opposing distal end, wherein a second slot (between 120 and 110) is defined between the third beam and the fourth beam and a third slot is defined between the fourth beam and the fifth beam, the fourth beam configured to move relative to the third beam and the fifth beam (Fig. 1 seen upside-down) to deflect in a direction perpendicular to the plane (intended use); and a press-fit pin (at 130) attached to an edge of the distal end of the fourth beam.
Lybrand discloses substantially the claimed invention except for the widths of the fourth beam. Klein teaches a fourth beam (55), wherein a width of the lower end of the beam (left side in Fig. 2a) is less than a width of the distal end (at 57). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use the widths taught by Klein, in order to provide the desired resiliency for the beam while providing a stable seating.
Regarding claim 2, Lybrand discloses the second portion being wider (in area) than the first portion.
Regarding claim 3, Lybrand discloses the distal end of the fourth beam (around 130) being wider than the attached lower end of the fourth beam.
Regarding claim 4, Daoud teaches (in Fig. 6) the second portion defining: a first outer edge and a second outer edge opposite from the first outer edge (on both sides of 58a), a first shoulder feature extending inwardly from the first outer edge and perpendicular to the slot, and a second shoulder feature extending inwardly from the second outer edge and perpendicular to the slot, and the first beam (48) and the second beam each (50) extend from a corresponding one of the first shoulder feature and the second shoulder feature, away from the second portion. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use shoulders, as taught by Daoud, in order to fit the second portion on a desired width/housing.
Regarding claim 6, Lybrand discloses the first shoulder feature and the second shoulder feature configured to limit an insertion depth of the insulation displacement terminal to a predetermined depth within a terminal support feature of a housing of an electronic control module (intended use).
Regarding claim 7, Lybrand discloses the fourth beam further defines one or more holes (130) located adjacent to the edge of the distal end of the fourth beam.
Regarding claim 8, Lybrand discloses the first slot configured to receive and retain a lead of an electrical component and to provide an electrical connection between the lead and a hole receiving the press-fit pin (intended use).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paradis in view of Daoud.
Regarding claim 21, Daoud teaches (in Fig. 6, seen upside-down) a fourth beam (64) defines a distance between the attached lower end (at 58a) and the edge of the distal end (at 98), and wherein the distance between the attached lower end and the edge of the distal end is longer than an entire length of the press-fit pin (56a). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a longer fourth beam, as taught by Daoud, in order to provide more flexibility and to reach a longer distance to connect to the desired environment.
Claims 23, 24, 27 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lybrand et al. (US 10,276,955) in view of Daoud (US 6,102,729).
Regarding claim 23, Daoud teaches (in Fig. 6, seen upside-down) a fourth beam (64) defines a distance between the attached lower end (at 58a) and the edge of the distal end (at 98), and wherein the distance between the attached lower end and the edge of the distal end is longer than an entire length of the press-fit pin (56a). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a longer fourth beam, as taught by Daoud, in order to provide more flexibility and to reach a longer distance to connect to the desired environment.
Regarding claim 24, Daoud teaches the distance between the attached lower end and the edge of the distal end is at least two times longer than the entire length of the press-fit pin (see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 27, Daoud teaches the second portion (around 58a) being wider than the first portion (around 58).
Regarding claim 28, Daoud teaches the distal end of the fourth beam (under 74 in Fig. 6) wider than the attached lower end of the fourth beam (next to 58a).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection, as applied.
In response to Applicant's request for a rule regarding the drawing objection of Figure 8a, please note that 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3) was already provided. The section lines in drawings should refer to the view number of the sectional view where it is shown (i.e. 8a).
In response to Applicant's arguments regarding claim 16, please note that Paradis discloses the fourth beam configured as a cantilever beam with an attached lower end and a distal end separated from the third beam by a second slot (between 44 and 42) between the third beam and the fourth beam, and from the fifth beam (intended use) by a third slot (between 42 and 44) defined between the fourth beam and the fifth beam.
In response to applicant's argument regarding claim 22, please note that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In this case, please note that the housing is intended use and not part of the claimed invention. Accordingly, the limitation if given little patentable weight. Nonetheless, Lybrand discloses an edge (on 110) positioned outwardly (away from) of a first terminal support feature and a second terminal support feature (under 120, Fig.4) defined by the housing, and wherein the fourth beam has a width that is less than a distance between the first and second terminal support features.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FELIX O FIGUEROA whose telephone number is (571)272-2003. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, Renee Luebke can be reached at (571)727-2009. 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.
/FELIX O FIGUEROA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2833