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 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “umbilical cable” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Paragraph [0028] of the applicant’s publication discloses “an embodiment of the umbilical cable,” but the umbilical cable is not labeled. It is unclear if the umbilical cable is the entire cable system, including “fixtures” 301 and 302, conducting wires 303 and a connector 304 or separate cables within system.
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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “303” has been used to designate both “two conducting wires” (disclosed in paragraph [0028]) and “a portion of the cable” (disclosed in paragraph [0029]). 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Figure 4 includes item 33, which is not mentioned in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
1. Claims 1 – 4, 13, 14, 15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Horenstein (US 20040145340).
Regarding claim 1, Horenstein teaches a system for supporting jump-starting of a motorcycle (figure 1 items 12, 14, and 40 defined in paragraph [0022] as a multi-part jumper cable system. Figure 2 item 110 a motorcycle jumpstarting kit) comprising:
an umbilical cable (figure 1 item 12 defined in paragraph [0022] a first portion of a multi-part jumper cable. Figure 1 shows wherein the umbilical cable is exposed to the outside within a storage compartment. Paragraph [0024] discloses wherein the storage compartment is on the rear or the side of the seat, so opening or lifting up the seat is not required) ;
a jumper cable (figure 2 item 16 defined in paragraph [0026] as a third portion of the jumper cable);
the umbilical cable comprises a two-conductor, insulated, wire portion (figure 2 item 32 defined in paragraph [0023] as two electrical cables. Claim 1 discloses wherein the two-wire portion is insulated);
the umbilical cable has two fixtures on one end operative to be firmly attached to a motorcycle's battery's terminals (figures 1 and 2 shows two fixtures on the cable to be connected to battery terminals item 34) ;
the umbilical cable has a two-polarity connector on its opposite end operative to interface with an accessory cable having a mating connector, and operative to be joined by arranging the connector and mating connector in only one orientation (figures 1 and 2 item 40 defined in paragraph [0028] as a connector which ensure proper polarity which connects to an accessory cable item 14 via connector 42)
the jumper cable comprises a two-conductor, insulated, wire portion (Figure 2 item 16 shows a two-conductor wire portion item 38 and 36 claims 1 and 2 discloses wherein the wires are insulated);
the jumper cable has on one end attachment structures operative to temporarily attach each attachment structure to each battery terminal on a jump-start power source (figure 2 items 72 and 74 defined in paragraph [0026] as alligator clamps which connect with battery terminals); and
the jumper cable has on the opposite end the mating connector operative to interface with the connector on the umbilical cable when inserted in only one orientation (figure 2 item 46 is a connector which connects with the accessory cable or the umbilical cord. Paragraph [0033] discloses wherein the system may be used as a two part cable system with the first (item 12) and second (item 16) section).
PNG
media_image1.png
565
676
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 shows a motorcycle jumper cable system
PNG
media_image2.png
607
663
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2 shows the motorcycle jumper cable system
Regarding claim 2, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1 further comprising: a battery-charger/battery-tender interface accessory cable comprising a two-conductor, insulated, wire portion (figure 3 shows two conductors (wires 56 and 58) and interface item 44, defined as a hermaphroditic connector. Claims 1 and 2 discloses wherein the wires are insulated);
the battery-charger/battery-tender interface accessory cable has on one end a battery-charger/battery-tender interface connector compatible with the interface connector of the battery-charger/battery-tender device (figure 3 shows wherein the interface accessory is connectable with a battery charger 120); and
the battery-charger/battery-tender interface accessory cable has on its opposite end a mating connector operative to interface with the connector on the umbilical cable when inserted in only one orientation (paragraph [0032] discloses wherein the connector 44 connects to the first jumper cable section 12).
Regarding claim 3, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1 further comprising: an umbilical-to-umbilical interface accessory cable comprising a two-conductor, insulated, wire portion (figure 2 shows an umbilical-to-umbilical interface accessory item 14 defined in paragraph [0022] as a second portion); and
the umbilical-to-umbilical interface accessory cable has on both ends the mating connector operative to interface with the connector on the umbilical cable when inserted in only one orientation (figure 2 shows wherein the umbilical-to-umbilical interface accessory item 14 includes a mating connector on both ends 42 and 48) .
Regarding claim 13, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1 wherein: the fixtures on one end of the umbilical cable are operative to be attached directly to the motorcycle's battery terminals (figures 1 and 2 show wherein one end of the umbilical cable, item 12, is attached directly to the motorcycle’s battery terminals item 34).
Regarding claim 14, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1 wherein: the fixtures on one end of the umbilical cable are operative to be firmly attached to another attachment fixture that is directly attached to the motorcycle's battery terminal (figures 1 and 2 show wherein one end of the umbilical cable, item 12, is attached directly to the motorcycle’s battery terminals item 34. Paragraph [0011] discloses wherein the cable may be firmly or permanently installed on the battery terminal).
Regarding claim 15, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 2 wherein: the battery-charger/battery-tender accessory cable is operative to interface with a cable of the battery-charger/battery-tender device (figure 3 shows wherein the battery accessory cable items 44, 56 and 58 and interface with the battery charger device item 120).
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.
1. Claims 4, 7, 10, and 18 – 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horenstein (US 20040145340) in view of Stecewycz (US 20220263257).
Regarding claim 4, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded copper wire.
Stecewycz teaches wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded copper wire (paragraph [0100] wherein the electrical conductor is made of stranded copper wire).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Stecewycz reference so that the electrical current levels are safely conducted during charging or jump-starting operations.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Stecewycz reference in paragraph [0100] wherein safely conducting electrical current levels is taught.
Regarding claim 7, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 2 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded copper wire.
Stecewycz teaches wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded copper wire (paragraph [0100] wherein the electrical conductor is made of stranded copper wire).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Stecewycz reference so that the electrical current levels are safely conducted during charging or jump-starting operations.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Stecewycz reference in paragraph [0100] wherein safely conducting electrical current levels is taught.
Regarding claim 10, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 3 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded copper wire.
Stecewycz teaches wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded copper wire (paragraph [0100] wherein the electrical conductor is made of stranded copper wire).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Stecewycz reference so that the electrical current levels are safely conducted during charging or jump-starting operations.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Stecewycz reference in paragraph [0100] wherein safely conducting electrical current levels is taught.
Regarding claim 18, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the jumper-cable attachment fixtures are comprised of copper alloy.
Stecewycz teaches wherein: the jumper-cable attachment fixtures are comprised of copper alloy (defined in paragraph [0007] wherein jumper cable attachments are made of copper alloy).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Stecewycz reference so that the electrical current levels are safely conducted during charging or jump-starting operations.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Stecewycz reference in paragraph [0100] wherein safely conducting electrical current levels is taught.
Regarding claim 19, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-polarity connector is asymmetric such that a mating connector can only interface to it in one orientation.
Stecewycz teaches wherein: the two-polarity connector is asymmetric such that a mating connector can only interface to it in one orientation (figure 50 wherein a two-polarity connector shows as connector item 904 is asymmetric and may only be mated in one orientation. Figure 50 shows asymmetrical female sockets allowing a mating with male plug 913).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Stecewycz reference so that errors in connecting the connector is prevented.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Stecewycz reference in [0138] wherein preventing connection errors taught.
PNG
media_image3.png
709
538
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Stecewycz figure 50 shows asymmetrically shaped connectors
Regarding claim 20, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 2 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-polarity connector is asymmetric such that a mating connector can only interface to it in one orientation.
Stecewycz teaches wherein: the two-polarity connector is asymmetric such that a mating connector can only interface to it in one orientation (figure 50 wherein a two-polarity connector shows as connector item 904 is asymmetric and may only be mated in one orientation. Figure 50 shows asymmetrical female sockets allowing a mating with male plug 913).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Stecewycz reference so that errors in connecting the connector is prevented.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Stecewycz reference in [0138] wherein preventing connection errors taught.
Regarding claim 21, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 3 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-polarity connector is asymmetric such that a mating connector can only interface to it in one orientation.
Stecewycz teaches wherein: the two-polarity connector is asymmetric such that a mating connector can only interface to it in one orientation(figure 50 wherein a two-polarity connector shows as connector item 904 is asymmetric and may only be mated in one orientation. Figure 50 shows asymmetrical female sockets allowing a mating with male plug 913).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Stecewycz reference so that errors in connecting the connector is prevented.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Stecewycz reference in [0138] wherein preventing connection errors taught.
2. Claims 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horenstein (US 20040145340) in view of Nook (US 20180342891).
Regarding claim 5, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded aluminum wire.
Nook teaches wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded aluminum wire (paragraph [0037] teaches wherein an inner conductor e.g. solid wire conductor or multi-strand metal wire conductor, e.g. made of copper, aluminum).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Nook reference so electrical conductivity is maximized between the battery and the battery jumpstart device.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Nook reference in [0031] maximizing electrical conductivity is taught.
Regarding claim 6, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of a blend of stranded copper and aluminum wires.
Nook teaches wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of a blend of stranded copper and aluminum wires (paragraph [0037] teaches wherein an inner conductor e.g. solid wire conductor or multi-strand metal wire conductor, e.g. made of copper, aluminum).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Nook reference so electrical conductivity is maximized between the battery and the battery jumpstart device.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Nook reference in [0031] maximizing electrical conductivity is taught.
Regarding claim 8, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 2 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded aluminum wire.
Nook teaches wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded aluminum wire (paragraph [0037] teaches wherein an inner conductor e.g. solid wire conductor or multi-strand metal wire conductor, e.g. made of copper, aluminum).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Nook reference so electrical conductivity is maximized between the battery and the battery jumpstart device.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Nook reference in [0031] maximizing electrical conductivity is taught.
Regarding claim 9, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 2 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of a blend of stranded copper and aluminum wires.
Nook teaches wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of a blend of stranded copper and aluminum wires (paragraph [0037] teaches wherein an inner conductor e.g. solid wire conductor or multi-strand metal wire conductor, e.g. made of copper, aluminum).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Nook reference so electrical conductivity is maximized between the battery and the battery jumpstart device.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Nook reference in [0031] maximizing electrical conductivity is taught.
Regarding claim 11, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 3 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded aluminum wire.
Nook teaches wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of stranded aluminum wire (paragraph [0037] teaches wherein an inner conductor e.g. solid wire conductor or multi-strand metal wire conductor, e.g. made of copper, aluminum).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Nook reference so electrical conductivity is maximized between the battery and the battery jumpstart device.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Nook reference in [0031] maximizing electrical conductivity is taught.
Regarding claim 12, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 3 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of a blend of stranded copper and aluminum wires.
Nook teaches wherein: the two-conductor, insulated, wire portion is made of a blend of stranded copper and aluminum wires (paragraph [0037] teaches wherein an inner conductor e.g. solid wire conductor or multi-strand metal wire conductor, e.g. made of copper, aluminum).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Nook reference so electrical conductivity is maximized between the battery and the battery jumpstart device.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Nook reference in [0031] maximizing electrical conductivity is taught.
3. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horenstein (US 20040145340) in view of Richardet (US 8172603).
Regarding claim 16, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the jumper-cable attachment fixtures are comprised of copper metal.
Richardet teaches wherein: the jumper-cable attachment fixtures are comprised of copper metal (defined in column 5 lines 30 – 37 wherein the jumper-cable attachment fixtures, defined as ring terminals 33 are comprised of copper. Column 5 lines 54 – 60 discloses wherein other attachment fixtures, alligator clips are made of copper and copper alloys).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Richardet reference so that errors in connecting the connector is prevented.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Richardet reference in [0138] wherein preventing connection errors taught.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horenstein (US 20040145340) in view of Stecewycz (US 20160185242 ).
Regarding claim 17, Horenstein teaches a claim as in claim 1 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the jumper-cable attachment fixtures are comprised of aluminum metal.
Stecewycz teaches wherein wherein: the jumper-cable attachment fixtures are comprised of aluminum metal (defined in paragraphs [0057] and [0072] wherein jumper cable clamps may be comprised of aluminum).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Horenstein reference with the connector system of the Stecewycz reference so that the electrical conductivity is increased during charging or jumpstarting.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Stecewycz reference in paragraph [0057] wherein increasing electrical conductivity is taught.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Us 20150349553 A1 System For Vehicle Jump Starting Chapple; Charles
Us 20120103716 A1 Drive Assembly For Motorcycle Fujihara; Kiyotaka
Us 5921809 A Safety Battery And Jumper Cables Therefor Fink; David Marshall
Us 6343949 B1 Modular Jumper Cable Floyd; Marvin
Us 4963102 A Electrical Connector Of The Hermaphroditic Gettig; William A. Et Al.
Us 20050070155 A1 Jumper Cable System Horenstein, Randy J.
Us 20120197470 A1 Motorcycle Inui; Shujiro
Us 20200047841 A1 Seat Caddy For Charging Cable Luckjohn; Kenneth G. Et Al.
Us 20090091292 A1 Motor Cycle Power Adapter Nippear; Kelly Et Al.
Us 11458851 B2 Jump Starting Apparatus Nook; Jonathan Lewis Et Al.
Us 9484760 B2 Extendable Jumper Cables Pierson; Robert A.
Us 8376775 B2 Safety Jumper Cables Rinehardt; Steven M
Us 20100078246 A1 Saddle-Ride Electric Vehicle Sasage; Taiki Et Al.
Us 20160185242 A1 Polarized Battery Clamp And Booster Cable Stecewycz; Joseph
Us 12476395 B2 Jump Starting Systems Stecewycz; Joseph
Us 9368912 B1 Jumper Cables With Keyed Connectors Sullivan; Keric
Us 20120235629 A1 Bike Jumper Kits Wood; Douglas K.
Us 20130143432 A1 Charging Port Structure And Straddled Vehicle Yamashita; Yusaku Et Al.
Us 20040238253 A1 Under-Seat Structure For A Motorcycle Yonehana, Atsushi Et Al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXIS B PACHECO whose telephone number is (571)272-5979. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 - 5:30.
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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
ALEXIS BOATENG PACHECO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/ALEXIS B PACHECO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859