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 1-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. as being unpatentable over Muro (US 8801451 B2) and Hirabayashi (US 2013/0065436 A1).
Regarding claim 1: Muro (Marked version of figure 4b below) teaches a connector, comprising:
a terminal (i.e. 120) including a connecting portion (i.e. 121) connected to a mating terminal; and
a connector housing (i.e. housing of 110) including a terminal accommodating portion (i.e. 111) configured to accommodate the terminal and a locking lance (i.e. 116) configured to lock the terminal accommodated in the terminal accommodating portion,
wherein a housing-side opening (i.e. O1 and O2) is formed in a front part of the terminal accommodating portion,
the housing-side opening includes a first opening part (i.e. O1) into which a tab portion of the mating terminal is inserted, and a second opening part (i.e. O2) configured to receive an unlocking operation of the locking lance,
the locking lance includes a locking projection (i.e. portion which extends into slot behind 126),
the connecting portion is formed with a terminal-side opening (i.e. opening of 121) into which the tab portion passed through the first opening part is inserted, and a lock receiving portion (i.e. slot behind 126) locked by the locking projection,
a part (i.e. P) of the terminal around the terminal-side opening is directly exposed through the second opening part in a same region as the locking projection when observed from a front of the connector housing along a front-rear direction, the part of the terminal including a conductive piece (i.e. leg of P resting on 116) that extends upwardly toward the terminal-side opening when the terminal is accommodated into the terminal accommodating portion,
but does not specifically teach
a front end of the locking lance in the front-rear direction is located at a same position as or in front of that of the terminal and located at a same position as or behind that of the terminal accommodating portion,
wherein the conductive piece of the terminal directly faces a portion formed between the front end of the locking lance and the locking projection of the locking lance in a vertical direction when the terminal is accommodated into the terminal accommodating portion, and
the front end of the locking lance further extends in a front direction than a front end of the conductive piece.
However, Hirabayashi (Figure 1) teaches
a front end (i.e. 35F) of the locking lance (i.e. 32) in the front-rear direction is located at a same position as or in front of that of the terminal and located at a same position as or behind that of the terminal accommodating portion (i.e. as in figure 1),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the locking lance taught by Muro to have a front end as taught by Hirabayashi because the unlocking process of the locking lance becomes easier to perform, the more the front end is extended.
Now, in combination, Muro and Hirabayashi teach,
wherein the conductive piece of the terminal directly faces a portion (i.e. corner between Muro’s 116c and added front end of Hirabayashi) formed between the front end of the locking lance and the locking projection of the locking lance in a vertical direction when the terminal is accommodated into the terminal accommodating portion,
but, in combination, do not specifically teach,
the front end of the locking lance further extends in a front direction than a front end of the conductive piece.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further extend the front end of the locking lance taught by Muro in view of Hirabayashi further than a front end of the conductive piece so as to routinely optimize the unlocking operation of the locking lance.
PNG
media_image1.png
390
742
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2: Muro and Hirabayashi teach the connector of claim 1, Muro (Figure above) further teaches wherein a positioning wall portion (i.e. front wall of O1) configured to cover a front end of the terminal from a front of the terminal while narrowing the housing-side opening is provided on a front end of the terminal accommodating portion.
Regarding claim 3: Muro and Hirabayashi teach the connector of claim 2, Muro (Figures 1, 3, and figure above) further teaches wherein:
the connecting portion is provided by bending and deforming a conductive plate (i.e. as claimed, the manner in which the terminal is formed does not impact the structure of the claimed connector),
the connecting portion includes a plate-like part (i.e. all of the connecting portion is plate-like) extending in the front-rear direction, a resilient piece (i.e. upper leg of P) extending forward from a rear end of the plate-like part and brought into contact with the tab portion, and a protecting piece (i.e. 126) serving as the conductive piece and extending toward the terminal-side opening from a front end of the plate-like part,
a tip part of the protecting piece covers a front end of the resilient piece from a front of the resilient piece (i.e. as in figure 1), and
a base end part of the protecting piece is exposed through the second opening part when observed from the front of the connector housing along the front-rear direction (i.e. as understood from figure 4).
Regarding claim 4: Muro and Hirabayashi teach the connector of claim 3, Muro (Figure above) further teaches wherein:
the lock receiving portion includes a recess (i.e. recess of the slot behind 126) formed in the plate-like part, and
the connecting portion includes a projecting piece (i.e. end of lower leg of P) projecting from a peripheral edge part of the recess, out of the plate-like part, and interposed between the locking projection and the resilient piece (i.e. as in the figure above).
Regarding claim 9: Muro and Hirabayashi teach the connector of claim 4, Muro (Figure above) further teaches wherein the projecting piece is interposed between the locking projection and the resilient piece in a vertical direction (i.e. as in the figure above) to be separated in the vertical direction from the resilient piece before the tab portion of the mating terminal is inserted into the first opening part (i.e. as understood from the figure above).
Regarding claim 5: Muro and Hirabayashi teach the connector of claim 3, Muro (Figure above) further teaches wherein:
the positioning wall portion of the terminal accommodating portion includes a partition wall portion (i.e. separating O1 and O2) partitioning between the first opening part and the second opening part, and
the partition wall portion covers the tip part of the protecting piece from a front of the protecting piece (i.e. as in the figure above).
Regarding claim 6: Muro and Hirabayashi teach the connector of claim 5, Muro (Figure above) further teaches wherein:
a slope portion (i.e. slope of O1) configured to guide the tab portion toward inside of the first opening part is provided on a peripheral edge part of the first opening part, out of the positioning wall portion, and the partition wall portion has a part (i.e. sloped part of O1) constituted only by the slope portion.
Regarding claim 7: Muro and Hirabayashi teach the connector of claim 1, Muro (Figure above) further teaches wherein:
the connector housing includes a first terminal accommodating portion (i.e. 111) and a second terminal accommodating portion (i.e. second 111),
a rear part of the first terminal accommodating portion and that of the second terminal accommodating portion are connected to each other (i.e. each 111 cannot be physically separated)
a front part of the first terminal accommodating portion and that of the second terminal accommodating portion are separated from each other (i.e. via being distinct channels), and
the locking lance provided in the first terminal accommodating portion is facing the second terminal accommodating portion (i.e. faces down).
Regarding claim 10: Muro and Hirabayashi teach the connector of claim 1, Muro further teaches wherein the unlocking operation of the locking lance is performed through the second opening part of the housing-side opening using an unlocking element from the front of the connector housing (i.e. as understood from figure 4).
Regarding claim 8: Muro (Figure 4a and marked version of figure 4b above) teaches a connector device (i.e. structure of figure above), comprising: a connector (i.e. structure of figure 4a) including:
a terminal (i.e. 120) including a connecting portion (i.e. 121) connected to a mating terminal (i.e. M); and
a connector housing (i.e. 110) including a terminal accommodating portion (i.e. 111) configured to accommodate the terminal and a locking lance (i.e. 116) configured to lock the terminal accommodated in the terminal accommodating portion,
wherein a housing-side opening (i.e. O1 and O2) is formed in a front part of the terminal accommodating portion,
the housing-side opening includes a first opening part (i.e. O1) into which a tab portion (i.e. end of M) of the mating terminal is inserted, and a second opening part (i.e. O2) configured to receive an unlocking operation of the locking lance,
the locking lance includes a locking projection (i.e. portion which extends into slot behind 126),
the connecting portion is formed with a terminal-side opening (i.e. receiving M) into which the tab portion passed through the first opening part is inserted, and a lock receiving portion (i.e. slot behind 126) locked by the locking projection,
a part (i.e. P) of the terminal around the terminal-side opening is directly exposed through the second opening part in a same region as the locking projection when observed from a front of the connector housing along a front-rear direction, the part of the terminal including a conductive piece (i.e. bottom leg of P) that extends toward the terminal-side opening, and
a mating connector (i.e. mating connector of column 1, lines 25-28) connected to the connector, wherein the connector housing of the connector and a connector housing of the mating connector face each other in the front-rear direction in a connected state (i.e. as is required to reach the state of figure 4b),
but does not specifically teach,
a front end of the locking lance in the front-rear direction is located at a same position as or in front of that of the terminal and located at a same position as or behind that of the terminal accommodating portion,
wherein the conductive piece of the terminal directly faces a portion between the front end of the locking lance and the locking projection of the locking lance in a vertical direction when the terminal is accommodated into the terminal accommodating portion, and
the front end of the locking lance further extends in a front direction than a front end of the conductive piece.
However, Hirabayashi (Figure 1) teaches
a front end (i.e. 35F) of the locking lance (i.e. 32) in the front-rear direction is located at a same position as or in front of that of the terminal and located at a same position as or behind that of the terminal accommodating portion (i.e. as in figure 1),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the locking lance taught by Muro to have a front end as taught by Hirabayashi so as to facilitate easier disengagement of the locking lance from the terminal.
Now, in combination, Muro and Hirabayashi teach,
wherein the conductive piece of the terminal directly faces a portion (i.e. corner between Muro’s 116c and added front end of Hirabayashi) between the front end of the locking lance and the locking projection of the locking lance in a vertical direction when the terminal is accommodated into the terminal accommodating portion,
but, in combination, do not specifically teach,
the front end of the locking lance further extends in a front direction than a front end of the conductive piece.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further extend the front end of the locking lance taught by Muro in view of Hirabayashi further than a front end of the conductive piece so as to routinely optimize the unlocking operation of the locking lance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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.
/GREGORY L MANGOT/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834