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 .
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.
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 of this title, 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 1-7 and 10-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maalouf (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0102423 A1) in view of Ogawa (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0242599 A1), and in further view of Tawada (US 20150139446 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Maalouf teaches: ‘An apparatus comprising: a sensor (Maalouf, Fig.1, Sensor / Microphone 112; Par 0023: “...audible sensor 112 may be or may include a microphone and may be referred to hereinafter as a microphone 112...”) configured to detect a first vibration (Maalouf, Par 0023: “...audible sensor capable of detecting the audible click made when the electrical connectors 102, 104 are mated.”) generated by an engagement of a locking mechanism of an electrical connector (Maalouf, Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made...”) and to generate a first time domain signal representative of the first vibration (Maalouf, Par 0026: “The controller 114 receives audio signals from the microphone 112...”); a memory for storing (Maalouf, Fig.1, Template Module 120; Par 0041: “...template module 120 may include audio signatures...”; Par 0052: “...processor may also include a memory...”) a second signal representative of a second vibration (Maalouf, Par 0041: “...template module 120 may include audio signatures of the various types of electrical connectors 102, 104.” Maalouf’s templates are audio signatures of the sounds produced by the mating of various connectors. These audio signatures teach the claim’s second vibration, which is represented by the claim’s second signal.) generated in response to a properly engaged locking mechanism of the electrical connector (Maalouf, Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made...” Maalouf’s templates, or characteristic audio signatures, represent these same audible clicks, which then serve as reference audio for comparison to measured audio.); a processor configured (Maalouf, Fig.1, Controller 114) to compare the first signal to the second signal (Maalouf, Par 0029:“...the controller 114 compares the audio signals from the microphone 112 to templates or characteristic signatures for mating assurance.”) and to generate a connector status signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”) in response to the first signal matching the second signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “...comparing the audible signals to the templates to identify the “click” or other sound associated with connector mating...”)’ and ‘and a user interface (Maalouf, Fig.1, Display 118) for displaying an indication of a fully seated connector (Maalouf, Par 0039: “The display 118 may display visual confirmation that proper mating has occurred based on the audio signals processed by the controller 114...”) in response to the connector status signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”)’.
Maalouf is not relied upon herein to teach: ‘above a threshold certainty’.
However Ogawa teaches: ‘above a threshold certainty (Ogawa, Par 0081: “...which exceeds a predetermined threshold that is set to a sound waveform.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘above a threshold certainty’ in Maalouf’s invention as taught by Ogawa’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to allow for the determination of a connector’s fitting condition as well as the analysis of waveforms (Ogawa, Par 0088: “...for determining a fitting condition of a connector.” And Ogawa, Par 0082: “...the sound waveform is analyzed...”).
Maalouf, in view of Ogawa, does not specifically teach “. .a second matrix representative of a second plurality of magnitudes. .wherein each of the second plurality of magnitudes correspond to one of a specific time and a specific frequency. .generate a first matrix having a first plurality of magnitudes, each corresponding to the one of the specific time and the specific frequency, in response to a continuous wavelet transform performed on the first time domain signal, to compare the first plurality of magnitudes of the first matrix to the second plurality of magnitudes of the second matrix for each specific time and each specific frequency. .and to generate a connector status signal in response to the first plurality of magnitudes of the first matrix and the second plurality of magnitudes of the second matrix having a correlation. .” (Maalouf teaches separate first and second time domain signals and generation of first and second frequency domain signals and comparison thereof to determine connector status, Par 0042-0043). In a related field, Tawada teaches the use of matrices for classification of audio signals using wavelet transformation (Abstract; [0007]-[0009]; [0054]-[0055]; [0080]: “Furthermore, in the time-frequency conversion, a wavelet transform may be used instead of a Fourier transform, and in such a case, a scalogram is used instead of the amplitude spectrogram” It is noted a scalogram in practice employs continuous wavelet transform). It would have been further obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Maalouf, in view of Ogawa, to utilize matrices for comparison of the two time domain signals via their amplitudes with a continuous wavelet transform, such as taught by Tawada, as doing so is one of a finite number of possibilities for comparison of two acoustic signals such as evidenced by the above teachings of Maalouf and Tawada. Motivation for doing so would lie in properly separating a noise signal from a target signal, such as suggested by Tawada ([0004]-[0005]).
Regarding claim 2, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The apparatus of claim 1.
Maalouf further teaches: further including a haptic feedback device for providing a haptic feedback to a user (Maalouf, Par 0038: “The controller 114 may provide other types of feedback, such as tactile feedback to the user, which may be in the form of vibration”.) in response to the connector status signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”).
Regarding claim 3, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The apparatus of claim 1.
Maalouf further teaches: wherein the user interface is further operative to generate an audio alert (Maalouf, Par 0047: “...the controller 114 may provide audible, visual or other feedback outputs to the assembler to confirm that the connectors are properly mated.”) in response to the connector status signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”).
Regarding claim 4, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The apparatus of claim 1.
Maalouf further teaches: wherein the user interface is further operative to generate an audible output (Maalouf, Par 0038: “...the controller 114 provides audible feedback to the assembler based on the audio signals...speaker 116 may enhance (e.g., make louder) the click detected by the microphone 112 to make it easier or possible for the assembler to hear.”) of the second vibration (Maalouf, Par 0041: “...template module 120 may include audio signatures of the various types of electrical connectors 102, 104.” Maalouf’s Speaker 116 generates the audible output from the audio signature of the microphone signal, as well as a variety of audible feedback, including Maalouf’s audio signatures functioning as reference templates.) in response to the connector status signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”).
Regarding claim 5, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The apparatus of claim 1.
Maalouf further teaches: wherein the first vibration is a first sound (Maalouf, Par 0023: “...audible sensor capable of detecting the audible click made when the electrical connectors 102, 104 are mated.”) and the second vibration is a second sound (Maalouf, Par 0041: “...template module 120 may include audio signatures of the various types of electrical connectors 102, 104.” Maalouf’s templates are audio signatures of the sounds produced by the mating of various connectors. These audio signatures represent the claim’s second sound.).
Regarding claim 6, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The apparatus of claim 1.
Maalouf further teaches: wherein the processor is further configured to generate a first frequency domain signal in response to the first signal (Maalouf, Par 0043: “...frequency domain characteristic and/or other characteristics of the audio signal associated with the mating (e.g. the click) detected by the microphone 112 may be recorded...”).
Regarding claim 7, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The apparatus of claim 1.
Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada further teaches: wherein the first matrix is a represented as a first Scalogram and the second matrix is represented as a second Scalogram and wherein the first Scalogram is compared against the second Scalogram to determine if the connect is correctly seated into a corresponding socket and wherein the first Scalogram is generated in response to a combination of the first time domain signal and a first frequency domain signal by the continuous wavelet transform (As modified above, see further Tawada [0007]-[0009]; [0054]-[0055]; [0080]).
Regarding claim 10, Maalouf teaches: ‘A method comprising: detecting, by a sensor (Maalouf, Fig.1, Sensor / Microphone 112; Par 0023: “...audible sensor 112 may be or may include a microphone and may be referred to hereinafter as a microphone 112...”), a first vibration (Maalouf, Par 0023: “...audible sensor capable of detecting the audible click made when the electrical connectors 102, 104 are mated.”) generated by an engagement of a locking mechanism of an electrical connector (Maalouf, Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made...”); generating, by the sensor, a first time domain signal representative of the first vibration (Maalouf, Par 0026: “The controller 114 receives audio signals from the microphone 112...”); generating, by a processor, a control signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”) in response to the first signal matching a second signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “...comparing the audible signals to the templates to identify the “click” or other sound associated with connector mating...”) representative of a second vibration (Maalouf, Par 0041: “...template module 120 may include audio signatures of the various types of electrical connectors 102, 104.” Maalouf’s templates are audio signatures of the sounds produced by the mating of various connectors. These audio signatures teach the claim’s second vibration, which is represented by the claim’s second signal.) generated in response to an engagement of a fully seated electrical connector (Maalouf, Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made...” Maalouf’s templates, or characteristic audio signatures, represent these same audible clicks, which then serve as reference audio for comparison to measured audio.)’ and ‘displaying, by a user interface (Maalouf, Fig.1, Display 118), an indication of a fully seated connector (Maalouf, Par 0039: “The display 118 may display visual confirmation that proper mating has occurred based on the audio signals processed by the controller 114...”) in response to the control signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”)’.
Maalouf is not relied upon herein to teach: ‘above a threshold certainty’.
Ogawa teaches: ‘above a threshold certainty (Ogawa, Par 0081: “...which exceeds a predetermined threshold that is set to a sound waveform.”)’.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘above a threshold certainty’ in Maalouf’s invention as taught by Ogawa’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to allow for the determination of a connector’s fitting condition as well as the analysis of waveforms (Ogawa, Par 0001: “...for determining a fitting condition of a connector.” And Ogawa, Par 0082: “...the sound waveform is analyzed...”).
Maalouf, in view of Ogawa, does not specifically teach “a first matrix having a first plurality of magnitudes, each corresponding to the one of the specific time and the specific frequency, in response to a continuous wavelet transform performed on the first time domain signal; comparing, by the processor, the first plurality of magnitudes of the first matrix to a second plurality of magnitudes of a second matrix stored on a memory at a plurality of specific frequencies and a plurality of specific times common to each of the first matrix and the second matrix; generating, by the processor, a control signal in response to the first plurality of magnitudes of the first matrix and the second plurality of magnitudes of the second matrix having a correlation. .” (Maalouf teaches separate first and second time domain signals and generation of first and second frequency domain signals and comparison thereof to determine connector status, Par 0042-0043). In a related field, Tawada teaches the use of matrices for classification of audio signals using wavelet transformation (Abstract; [0007]-[0009]; [0054]-[0055]; [0080]: “Furthermore, in the time-frequency conversion, a wavelet transform may be used instead of a Fourier transform, and in such a case, a scalogram is used instead of the amplitude spectrogram” It is noted a scalogram in practice employs continuous wavelet transform). It would have been further obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Maalouf, in view of Ogawa, to utilize matrices for comparison of the two time domain signals via their amplitudes with a continuous wavelet transform, such as taught by Tawada, as doing so is one of a finite number of possibilities for comparison of two acoustic signals such as evidenced by the above teachings of Maalouf and Tawada. Motivation for doing so would lie in properly separating a noise signal from a target signal, such as suggested by Tawada ([0004]-[0005]).
Regarding claim 11, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The method of claim 10.
Maalouf further teaches: including providing a haptic feedback indicative of the engagement of the fully seated electrical connector to a user (Maalouf, Par 0038: “The controller 114 may provide other types of feedback, such as tactile feedback to the user, which may be in the form of vibration”. See also Par 0047: “...the controller 114 may provide audible, visual or other feedback outputs to the assembler to confirm that the connectors are properly mated.”) in response to the control signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”).
Regarding claim 12, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The method of claim 10.
Maalouf further teaches: including generate an audio alert indicative of the fully seated connector (Maalouf, Par 0047: “...the controller 114 may provide audible, visual or other feedback outputs to the assembler to confirm that the connectors are properly mated.”) in response to the control signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”).
Regarding claim 13, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The method of claim 10.
Maalouf further teaches: wherein the user interface is further operative to generate an audible output (Maalouf, Par 0038: “...the controller 114 provides audible feedback to the assembler based on the audio signals...speaker 116 may enhance (e.g., make louder) the click detected by the microphone 112 to make it easier or possible for the assembler to hear.”) of the second signal (Maalouf, Par 0041: “...template module 120 may include audio signatures of the various types of electrical connectors 102, 104.” Maalouf’s Speaker 116 generates the audible output from the audio signature of the microphone signal, as well as a variety of audible feedback, including Maalouf’s audio signatures functioning as reference templates.) in response to the control signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”).
Regarding claim 14, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The method of claim 10.
Maalouf further teaches: wherein the electrical connector is a connector position assurance connector (Maalouf, Fig.2, Connectors 102/104, Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made, such as when the latch 106 snaps down into position behind the catch 108...”) for an automotive application (Maalouf, Par 0033: “...mating assurance system 100 may be used during assembly of automotive electrical connectors.”).
Regarding claim 15, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The apparatus of claim 10.
Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada further teaches: wherein the first matrix is a represented as a first Scalogram and the second matrix is represented as a second Scalogram and wherein the first Scalogram is compared against the second Scalogram to determine if the connect is correctly seated into a corresponding socket and wherein the first Scalogram is generated in response to a combination of the first time domain signal and a first frequency domain signal by the continuous wavelet transform (As modified above, see further Tawada [0007]-[0009]; [0054]-[0055]; [0080]).
Regarding claim 16, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The method of claim 10.
Maalouf further teaches: wherein the processor is further configured to generate a first frequency domain signal in response to the first vibration (Maalouf, Par 0043: “...frequency domain characteristic and/or other characteristics of the audio signal associated with the mating (e.g. the click) detected by the microphone 112 may be recorded...”).
Regarding claim 17, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The method of claim 10.
Maalouf further teaches: wherein the first vibration is generated by a connector locking mechanism on the electrical connector engaging a restraint on a connector socket (Maalouf, Fig.2, Connectors 102/104, Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made, such as when the latch 106 snaps down into position behind the catch 108...”).
Regarding claim 18, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The method of claim 10.
Maalouf further teaches: further including a microphone (Maalouf, Fig.1, Sensor / Microphone 112; Par 0023: “...audible sensor 112 may be or may include a microphone and may be referred to hereinafter as a microphone 112...”) for detecting a sound generated by the engagement of the locking mechanism of the electrical connector (Maalouf, Par 0023: “...audible sensor capable of detecting the audible click made when the electrical connectors 102, 104 are mated.”; See also Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made...”).
Regarding claim 19, Maalouf teaches: ‘An electrical connector verification system (Maalouf, Par 0001: “...connector mating assurance systems and methods.”) comprising: a microphone (Maalouf, Fig.1, Sensor / Microphone 112; Par 0023: “...audible sensor 112 may be or may include a microphone and may be referred to hereinafter as a microphone 112...”) for detecting a first sound (Maalouf, Par 0023: “...audible sensor capable of detecting the audible click made when the electrical connectors 102, 104 are mated.”) generated by an engagement of a locking mechanism of an electrical connector (Maalouf, Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made...”) and for generating a first time domain signal representative of the first sound (Maalouf, Par 0026: “The controller 114 receives audio signals from the microphone 112...”); a processor (Maalouf, Fig.1, Controller 114) for generating a control signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”) in response to the first signal matching a second signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “...comparing the audible signals to the templates to identify the “click” or other sound associated with connector mating...”) representative of a second sound (Maalouf, Par 0041: “...template module 120 may include audio signatures of the various types of electrical connectors 102, 104.” Maalouf’s templates are audio signatures of the sounds produced by the mating of various connectors. These audio signatures teach the claim’s second vibration, which is represented by the claim’s second signal.) generated in response to a correct engagement of the locking mechanism of the electrical connector (Maalouf, Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made...” Maalouf’s templates, or characteristic audio signatures, represent these same audible clicks, which then serve as reference audio for comparison to measured audio.)’ and ‘and a user interface (Maalouf, Fig.1, Display 118), for displaying an indication of a correctly seated electrical connector (Maalouf, Par 0039: “The display 118 may display visual confirmation that proper mating has occurred based on the audio signals processed by the controller 114...”) in response to the control signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”)’.
Maalouf is not relied upon herein to teach: ‘above a certainty threshold’.
Ogawa teaches: ‘above a certainty threshold (Ogawa, Par 0081: “...which exceeds a predetermined threshold that is set to a sound waveform.”)’.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘above a certainty threshold’ in Maalouf’s invention as taught by Ogawa’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to allow for the determination of a connector’s fitting condition as well as the analysis of waveforms (Ogawa, Par 0088: “...for determining a fitting condition of a connector.” And Ogawa, Par 0082: “...the sound waveform is analyzed...”).
Maalouf, in view of Ogawa, does not specifically teach “a first matrix having a first plurality of magnitudes, each corresponding to the one of the specific time and the specific frequency, in response to a continuous wavelet transform performed on the first time domain signal; comparing, by the processor, the first plurality of magnitudes of the first matrix to a second plurality of magnitudes of a second matrix stored on a memory at a plurality of specific frequencies and a plurality of specific times common to each of the first matrix and the second matrix; generating, by the processor, a control signal in response to the first plurality of magnitudes of the first matrix and the second plurality of magnitudes of the second matrix having a correlation. .” (Maalouf teaches separate first and second time domain signals and generation of first and second frequency domain signals and comparison thereof to determine connector status, Par 0042-0043). In a related field, Tawada teaches the use of matrices for classification of audio signals using wavelet transformation (Abstract; [0007]-[0009]; [0054]-[0055]; [0080]: “Furthermore, in the time-frequency conversion, a wavelet transform may be used instead of a Fourier transform, and in such a case, a scalogram is used instead of the amplitude spectrogram” It is noted a scalogram in practice employs continuous wavelet transform). It would have been further obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Maalouf, in view of Ogawa, to utilize matrices for comparison of the two time domain signals via their amplitudes with a continuous wavelet transform, such as taught by Tawada, as doing so is one of a finite number of possibilities for comparison of two acoustic signals such as evidenced by the above teachings of Maalouf and Tawada. Motivation for doing so would lie in properly separating a noise signal from a target signal, such as suggested by Tawada ([0004]-[0005]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maalouf (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0102423 A1) in view of Ogawa (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0242599 A1) in further view of Tawada (US 20150139446 A1), and in further view of Kowalski (U.S. Patent No. 3760484 A).
Regarding claim 8, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The apparatus of claim 1.
Maalouf is not relied upon herein to teach: wherein the user interface is an assembly station status board.
However Kowalski teaches wherein the user interface is an assembly station status board (Kowalski, Col 2, Ln 44-47: “The assembly system comprises a program controlling means for supplying a parts identification signal to a magazine storage station and an installation signal to a visual indicating means at an assembly station”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘wherein the user interface is an assembly station status board’ in Maalouf’s modified invention as taught by Kowalski’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to allow for the correct positioning of the part to be assembled (Kowalski, Col 5, Ln 24-25: “The visual indicating means indicates the correct positioning of the released part to an assembler-operator for placement into an assembly jig at the assembly station.”).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maalouf (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0102423 A1) in view of Ogawa (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0242599 A1) in further view of Tawada (US 20150139446 A1), and in further view of Toyosato (U.S. Patent No. 6532482 B1).
Regarding claim 9, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The apparatus of claim 1.
Maalouf is not relied upon herein to teach: wherein the user interface is a wrist mounted display.
However Toyosato teaches: wherein the user interface is a wrist mounted display (Toyosato, Col 5, Ln 18-20: “In the present invention a lightweight display is used including a head-mounted display, a flat panel display, a wrist display...”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘wherein the user interface is a wrist mounted display’ in Maalouf’s modified invention as taught by Toyosato’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to allow for the use of a wireless display (Toyosato, Col 5, Ln 24-25: “Each display could be wireless connected...”).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maalouf (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0102423 A1) in view of Ogawa (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0242599 A1) in further view of Tawada (US 20150139446 A1), and in further view of Benner (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0163176 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Maalouf, in view of Ogawa and Tawada, teaches: The electrical connector verification system of claim 19.
Maalouf teaches: ‘generated by the engagement of the locking mechanism of the electrical connector (Maalouf, Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made...”)’ and ‘and wherein the processor is further operative for generating the control signal (Maalouf, Par 0046: “The mating assurance module 128 processes the audio signals and provides an output to another portion of the controller 114, to another controller 114 and/or provides feedback to the assembler.”)’ and ‘generated in response to the correct engagement of the locking mechanism of the electrical connector (Maalouf, Par 0035: “...when the latch 106 engages the catch 108 an audible click may be made...” Maalouf’s templates, or characteristic audio signatures, represent these same audible clicks, which then serve as reference audio for comparison to measured audio.)’.
Maalouf is not relied upon herein to teach: ‘further including an accelerometer’ and ‘ and for generating a third signal’ and ‘in response to the third signal matching a fourth signal representative of a second’ and ‘above the certainty threshold’.
But Ogawa teaches: ‘further including an accelerometer (Ogawa, Par 0084: “In this embodiment, sounds and acceleration are measured using a microphone and an accelerometer)’ and ‘and for generating a third signal (Ogawa, Par 0080: “...the acceleration waveform at the time of fitting a connector as shown in FIG. 3...”)’ and ‘in response to the third signal matching a fourth signal (Ogawa, Par 0076: “The acceleration information determination section 15 reads out the determination conditions from the reference value DB 16, and compares the determination conditions with the detection results, thereby determining whether the acceleration waveform corresponds to the acceleration waveform obtained at the time of fitting a connector.”) representative of a second (Ogawa, Par 0065: “...the determination device 10 is connected to a reference value DB 16 that stores...a reference value for determining the acceleration information.”)’ and ‘above the certainty threshold (Ogawa, Par 0081: “...which exceeds a predetermined threshold that is set to a sound waveform.”)’.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘further including an accelerometer’ and ‘and for generating a third signal’ and ‘in response to the third signal matching a fourth signal representative of a second’ and ‘above the certainty threshold’ in Maalouf’s invention as taught by Ogawa’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to allow for the determination of a connector’s fitting condition as well as the analysis of waveforms (Ogawa, Par 0088: “...for determining a fitting condition of a connector.” And Ogawa, Par 0082: “...the sound waveform is analyzed...”).
Maalouf is also not relied upon herein to teach: ‘for detecting a first vibration’ and ‘representative of the first vibration’ and ‘vibration’.
However Benner teaches: ‘for detecting a first vibration (Benner, Par 0026: “The connection indication detector 104 may include any type of sensor, film, membrane or any other sensing mechanism. In one embodiment, the connection indication detector 104 is a vibration sensor that detects a vibration of the connector 110...”)’ and ‘representative of the first vibration’ and ‘vibration (Benner, Par 0026: “...detector 104 is a vibration sensor that detects a vibration of the connector 110...”)’.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘for detecting a first vibration’ and ‘representative of the first vibration’ and ‘vibration’ in Maalouf’s invention as taught by Benner’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to allow for the determination of a secure connection with respect to the mechanical aspects of an electrical connector.(Benner, Par 0003: “...detecting sound or vibration indicating a secure connection of a mechanical connector...).
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 MATTHEW A EASON whose telephone number is (571)270-7230. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-4PM.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached at (571) 270-7230. 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.
/MATTHEW A EASON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2624