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 tenon and head which does not form an electrical connection, as recited in claims 2 and 4, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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.
Claim 2 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Here, claims 2 and 4 recite that the second positioning tenon is inserted and positioned in the third connector female head “without forming electrical connection.” Applicant cites the specification which states that the tenon 222 “may be a plastic structure” as supporting this amended language.
The amended claim language is new matter. The recitation that the tenon is plastic does not reasonably convey that the tenon does not form electrical connection. The disclosure discusses and shows the tenon 222 as a USB connector, which forms electrical connection with a corresponding female head. Furthermore, connector structures, including USB structures, utilize plastic in their construction and thus the mention of plastic is not dispositive of an electrical connector.
Claims 3 and 6 are also 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. Here, the claims recite that the connectors are without electrical connection, but then recite the connectors are USB connectors. The claims thus irreparably conflict with themselves. For the purposes of examination, the limitations stating that there is no electrical connection formed will be ignored when examining claims 3 and 6 in the prior art rejections below.
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 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. No. 6,669,513 (“Huang”).
Regarding claim 1, Huang discloses a hub power device, comprising:
a power supply (1), comprising a first combination surface (surface within 16), wherein the first combination surface comprises a first connector female head (161) and a second connector female head (162); and
a hub (2), comprising a first expansion surface (see the lateral surface with connectors, such as USB connectors of 25, in Figure 2) and a second combination surface (the lower surface meeting 161/162; Fig. 4), wherein the first expansion surface comprises a first connection port (see ports of 2), the second combination surface comprises a connector male head and a first positioning tenon (each box 2 has connectors for mating with 161/162, the connectors of 2 are inherently male because the connectors of 1 are shown as female, see col. 2, lns. 38 – 44);
wherein when the hub (2) is assembled with the power supply (1; cable 14 connects to power), the second combination surface is attached to the first combination surface (see Fig. 1), the connector male head is inserted and electrically connected to the first connector female head, and the first positioning tenon is inserted and positioned in the second connector female head (the male connectors of 2, discussed above, enter 161 and 162).
Regarding claim 8, Huang discloses the first connection port is a USB-A port (see USB-A ports on hub 25).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of U.S. Pat. No. 10,468,842 (“Sun”) and U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0143582 (“Hengel”).
Regarding claim 2, Huang discloses the first positioning tenon and the second connector female head are connectors matching with each other (the male connectors of 2, discussed above, enter 161 and 162), but does not disclose the connector male head and the first connector female head are a USB-C connector assembly matching with each other. However, Sun teaches utilizing a USB-C connector to connect a power supply to a hub (see power supply 100 with female USC-C 134 which connects to male USB-C 222 of hub 200). It would have been obvious to make the connector male head and first connector female head of Huang as a USB-C structure as taught by Sun, because this is a reliable and widely manufactured electrical connector.
Furthermore, while Huang discloses the first positioning tenon and second connector female head are connectors matching with each other, Huang does not disclose this connection as without forming electrical connection. However, Hengel teaches a connector device with electrical connector mating structures (male connectors 221, 232, 22 and female connectors 321, 332, 32) on connectors facing each other, and also teaches a positioning tenon (216) and matching connector female head (316) which connect and match with each other without forming electrical connection (see [0030]). It would have been obvious to include a tenon and female head as a first positioning tenon and second connector female head on the device of Huang which connects but does not form an electrical connection, because this structure acts as a guiding member and helps mechanically stabilize the connection between the two connectors when the connectors are mated together.
Claim 3, interpreted as discussed above, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of U.S. Pat. No. 10,468,842 (“Sun”).
Regarding claim 3, Huang discloses the first positioning tenon and the second connector female head are connectors matching with each other (the male connectors of 2, discussed above, enter 161 and 162), but does not disclose the connector male head and the first connector female head are a USB-C connector assembly matching with each other. However, Sun teaches utilizing a USB-C connector to connect a power supply to a hub (see power supply 100 with female USC-C 134 which connects to male USB-C 222 of hub 200). It would have been obvious to make the connector male head and first connector female head of Huang as a USB-C structure as taught by Sun, because this is a reliable and widely manufactured electrical connector.
Furthermore, Huang discloses the first positioning tenon and second female head are electrical connectors, but does not disclose wherein the first positioning tenon and the second connector female head are a USB-C connector assembly matching with each other. However, as already discussed Sun teaches utilizing USB-C connectors for mating a power supply and Hub. It would have been obvious to make each connector 161/162 of Huang into USB-C connectors, because this is a reliable and widely manufactured electrical connector.
Claims 4 – 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Hengel.
Regarding claim 4, Huang does not disclose the first combination surface further comprising a third connector female head, and the second combination surface further comprising a second positioning tenon, when the hub is assembled with the power supply, the second positioning tenon is inserted and positioned in the third connector female head without forming electrical connection.
However, Hengel teaches a connector device with electrical connector mating structures (male connectors 221, 232, 22 and female connectors 321, 332, 32) on connectors facing each other, and also teaches a positioning tenon (216) and matching connector female head (316) which connect and match with each other without forming electrical connection (see [0030]). It would have been obvious to include a tenon and female head as a second positioning tenon and third connector female head on the device of Huang which connects but does not form an electrical connection, because this structure acts as a guiding member and helps mechanically stabilize the connection between the two connectors when the connectors are mated together.
Regarding claim 5, Huang as modified as discussed in claim 4, above, results in wherein the second positioning tenon and the third connector female head are connectors matching with each other.
Regarding claim 7, Huang discloses the female connectors heads 161/162 arranged parallelly within slot 16 because the connectors face along an insertion direction and are spaced and thus are parallel along the insertion direction, and therefore the matching connectors on 2 are similarly arranged parallelly along the insertion direction, therefore Huang teaches placing female connectors and corresponding tenons parallelly to enable smooth connection of each connector structure. Furthermore, Hengel teaches tenon 216 arranged running parallel to the electrical connectors placed elsewhere on the connector body. It would have been obvious to make all the tenons be arranged parallel on the combination surface because this ensures that the tenons all smoothly mate with the respective female heads.
Claim 6, interpreted as discussed above, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang.
Regarding claim 6, Huang does not disclose the first combination surface further comprising a third connector female head, and the second combination surface further comprising a second positioning tenon, when the hub is assembled with the power supply, the second positioning tenon is inserted and positioned in the third connector female head. It would have been obvious to include a third connector and tenon, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8 (CA7 1977). Here, Huang already discloses multiple female connectors and corresponding tenon, so modifying Huang to have a third female connector and corresponding second male connector tenon would have been an obvious duplication of parts, allowing the power supply to supply power and data to the hub through an increased number of connector structures.
Furthermore, Huang teaches that USB-A connectors and corresponding tenons (see 161 and col. 2, lns. 38 – 44) are used to connect the power supply and hub, thus it would have been obvious to make the second positioning tenon and third connector female head a USB-A connector assembly for mating each other when the power supply mates with the hub, because this is a reliable and widely manufactured electrical connector.
Claims 9 – 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0061964 (“Cheng”).
Regarding claims 9, 10, and 11, Huang does not disclose second or third expansion surfaces, however Cheng teaches providing three expansion surfaces (102, 103, 104) on the sides of a rectangular hub member, including surfaces which include an SD port 18 and all USB ports 52. It would have been obvious to provide additional expansion surfaces on the sides of hub 2 of Huang, and include ports on those surfaces as taught by Cheng, because this increases the ability of the hub to connect to addition and/or more diverse devices as requires by a user.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of U.S. Pat. No. 10,082,853 (“Sun ‘853”).
Regarding claim 12, Huang does not disclose wherein the hub (2) comprises a power and signal transmitting cable. However, Huang does disclose the hub 2 as having USB ports (see 25). Sun ‘853 teaches that USB ports can connect to a cable and carry power and data signal transmissions (see the abstract and col. 1, lns. 21 – 31). It would have been obvious to provide a power and data signal cable connected to the hub of Huang as taught by Sun ‘852, because this allows a user to connect an electronic device to the hub and interface with the power supply/hub system as needed by a user to power the device and transmit data to other devices connected to the system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Applicant’s power supply 10 provides sufficient power to hub 20, and thus a cable is not needed, distinguishing the presently claimed invention from the prior art. Examiner notes that there is no claim language directed to a lack of a cable between a hub and power supply, and in any event the assembly of Huang does not utilize a cable between members 1 and 2.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 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 2833
/renee s luebke/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2833