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 final rejection. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/01/2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings remain objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the connector part having a channel, the channel having the shape of a helicoidal spring, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
Applicant argues that Figures 5 and 6 illustrate the channel being a shape of a helicoidal spring. Examiner cannot concur. Figure 5 merely illustrates a helicoidal spring shape in schematic form and Fig. 6 shows a linear channel 111. Claim 5 requires a channel having such a shape; thus, such a channel with such a shape must be shown in the figures.
Furthermore, the connector part “plug” recited in claim 3 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). While the figures illustrate a housing with a socket opening, the figures do not illustrate a plug as recited in the claims.
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 Objections
Claims 1, 2 and 5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 4, the claims reference numeral (10) which is indicated as the cable in the specification, but the reference numeral is not located at the cable claim element.
In claim 2, the “at least one additional parameter or feature” limitation includes a list of features. This list is being treated as a list of alternatives; line 10 should end in “or” to clearly indicate that the list is a list of alternatives.
In claim 5, “the channel” lacks antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 – 6 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.
In claim 1, it is recited that the connector part is configured to maintain “a same twist interval or an equivalent twist interval.” It is unclear what an “equivalent” twist interval would be, as this term is undefined in the specification and does not appear to be a known term of art. For examination purposes here, an “equivalent twist interval” is interpreted as requiring a twist interval of the same amount or quality as the twisted pair. There is no indication on how to determine whether a twist interval is the same amount or quality other than comparing the intervals and determining that the intervals are identical. Thus, the claim language is repetitive, at best, and is indefinite as presented because it is unclear why the two alternative intervals (“same” and “equivalent”) are presented, and a person of ordinary skill would not be able to differentiate the alternatives in any meaningful way because the “equivalent” twist interval term is confusing.
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 – 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2017-147170 A (“Matsui”)
Regarding claim 1, Matsui discloses a connector part (H) for a cable (3), wherein said cable comprises at least a twisted pair of wires (1, see Fig. 1) and wherein the connector part is configured to maintain throughout the connector a same twist interval or an equivalent twist interval as in the cable (see Figs. 6 and 9) so as to limit the introduction of a discontinuity in transmission by the connector (the twist shape helps the connector maintain the reduced electrical noise function of the twisted wires of the cable, see at least the abstract and paragraph 4 of page 7 of the translation).
Regarding claim 2, Matsui discloses the connector part wherein the connector part is further configured to maintain at least one additional parameter or feature of the cable, said additional parameter or feature of the cable comprises a distance between the pair of wires (the distance between the wires is maintained, see Fig. 6 and 9). Examiner again notes that the list of features of claim 2 is being treated as a list of alternatives and that the presence of at least one alternative meets the claim.
Regarding claim 3, Matsui discloses said connector part (H) is a plug or socket (see Figs. 6 - 8).
Regarding claim 4, Matsui discloses wherein said connector part comprises a channel (10/11).
Regarding claim 5, Matsui discloses wherein said channel (10/11) has a shape of a helicoidal spring (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Matsui discloses wherein said connector part (H) is combined with the cable (3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are not applicable to the current rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Fitzpatrick discloses a connector with a twisted pair cable, the connector maintains the twist interval through the connector housing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL D BAILLARGEON whose telephone number is (571)272-0676. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m.
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) 272-2009.
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.
/PAUL D BAILLARGEON/Examiner, Art Unit 2831
/renee s luebke/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights