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 .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on October 6, 2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-8, 11, 14-16, 19-20, and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bolante et al (Pat Num 4,490,576, herein referred to as Bolante) in view of Smith (Pat Num 8,274,000). Bolante discloses a cable gland (Figs 1-5), which is capable of assembly quickly and easily both to the cable end and an electrical box, accommodates a relatively wide range of cable sizes while providing a reasonable seal between the electrical box and an outside environment (Col 1, lines 24-31), while mechanically and electrically secures the metallic sheath of the cable to the connector (Col 2, lines 46-48). Specifically, with respect to claim 1, Bolante discloses a cable gland (10, Figs 1-5) comprising an entry component (12) including an inner surface (52) with an abutment (54, Col 3, lines 40-52), a backnut (16) removably attachable to the entry component (12, Col 4, lines 40-47), a cavity (34) extending through the entry component (12) and the backnut (16, Fig 1) and a grounding device (14) configured to rest against the abutment (54, Col 3, lines 40-52), wherein the grounding device (14) including an upper rim (60) configured to rest in a fixed position against the abutment (54, Col 3, lines 40-52), an intermediate portion (starting taper portion of 60 & 62) extends below the rim (60) with an inner edge (inside edge of 60, Fig 4), and a plurality of fingers (62) extending inward and downward from the inner edge (inside edge of 60, Fig 4), wherein the grounding device (14) is comprised of a conductive material (Col 3, lines 59-61) and wherein each of the plurality of fingers (62) are configured to flex outward to receive a cable (30) and maintain inward pressure on the cable (30) creating an electrical ground path from the cable (30) to the grounding device (14, Col 1, lines 40-60). With respect to claim 3, Bolante discloses that the cable gland (10) further comprising a seal (18) compressible in the cable gland (10) between the backnut (16) and the grounding device (14, Col 4, lines 12-26). With respect to claim 4, Bolante discloses that the cable gland (10), further comprises a washer (20) between the backnut (16) and the seal (18, Col 4, lines 27-34). With respect to claim 5, Bolante discloses that the cable gland (10), wherein the upper rim (60) has a flat lower surface for resting against the abutment (Figs 2-3). With respect to claim 6, Bolante discloses that each of the plurality of fingers (62) extends downward at an angle of at least 15 degrees with respect to a plane defined by the upper rim (60, Col 3, lines 64-68). With respect to claim 7, Bolante discloses that the cable gland (10), wherein the intermediate portion (starting taper portion of 60 & 62) includes an angled portion adjacent to the plurality of fingers (62, Fig 2). With respect to claim 8, Bawa discloses that the plurality of fingers (62) are substantially flat and has a length and a maximum width (Fig 4), wherein the length is greater than the maximum width (Fig 1, Col 3, lines 64-68). With respect to claim 11, Bolante discloses a grounding device (14) configured to rest against the abutment (54, Col 3, lines 40-52), wherein the grounding device (14) including a upper rim (60), an intermediate portion (starting taper portion of 60 & 62) radially inward of and below the upper rim (60, Fig 2) and defining an inner edge (inside edge of 60, Fig 4), a plurality of fingers (62) extending inward and downward from the inner edge (inside edge of 60, Fig 4), wherein the grounding device (14) is comprised of a conductive material (Col 3, lines 59-61), and wherein each of the plurality of fingers (62) are configured to flex outward to receive a cable (30) and maintain inward pressure on the cable (30) creating an electrical ground path from the cable (30) to the grounding device (14, Col 1, lines 40-60). With respect to claim 14, Bolante discloses that the intermediate portion (starting taper portion of 60 & 62) includes an angled portion adjacent to the plurality of fingers (62, Fig 2). With respect to claim 15, Bolante discloses that each of the plurality of fingers (62) extends downward at an angle of at least 15 degrees with respect to a plane defined by the rim (60, Col 3, lines 64-68). With respect to claim 16, Bolante discloses that the plurality of fingers (60) are substantially flat and has a length and a maximum width (Fig 1), wherein the length is greater than the maximum width (Fig 1, Col 4, lines 40-49). With respect to claim 19, Bolante discloses that the plurality of fingers (62) includes at least six fingers (Fig 4). With respect to claim 20, Bolante discloses that the upper rim (60) has a flat lower surface extending between the outer diameter of the upper rim (60) and the intermediate portion (starting taper portion of 60 & 62) for resting against the abutment (54, Col 3, lines 40-52). With respect to claim 22, Bolante discloses that the distant ends of the plurality of fingers (62) define an inner diameter (Fig 4), wherein the inner diameter increases upon receiving the cable (30, Col 1, lines 40-60).
However, Bolante doesn’t necessarily disclose the grounding device comprising an annular intermediate portion radially inward of the upper rim, nor the conductive material of the grounding device being comprised of spring steel (claim 1 & 11), nor the intermediate portion having an annular outer surface, below the flat lower surface of the upper rim and configured to engage against the inner surface of the entry component (claim 23), nor the intermediate portion having an annular outer surface between the flat lower surface of the upper rim (claim 24).
Smith teaches a cable gland (Figs 1-5) that is simple and easy to use (Col 1, lines 64-67), as well as being easily removable from an electrical metallic tubing (Col 2, lines 1-2), while providing a secure holder for the metallic tubing, and while also providing a good electrical continuity (i.e. ground) and relative low voltage drop across the electrical tubing (Col 2, lines 29-36). Specifically, with respect to claims 1 & 11, Smith teaches a cable gland (10) comprising an entry component (12) including an inner surface with an abutment (42, Col 3, lines 33-34), a backnut (28) removably attachable to the entry component (12, Fig 3), a cavity (32, 34) extending through the entry component (12) and the backnut (28), and a grounding device (20, as shown in Figs 4A-4D), wherein the grounding device (20) including an upper rim (44) configured to rest in a fixed position against the abutment (42), an annular intermediate portion (46) radially inward of the upper rim (44) with an inner edge (48) radially inward of and below the upper rim (40), and a plurality of fingers (50) extending inward and downward from an inner edge (48), wherein the grounding device (20) is comprised of a conductive material, such as spring steel (Col 4, lines 14-17). With respect to claims 23-24, Smith teaches that the intermediate portion (46) has an annular outer surface (Figs 4A-4D), below the flat lower surface of the upper rim (44) and configured to engage against the inner surface (42) of the entry component (12, Col 3, lines 53-67).
With respect to claims 1, 11, 23, and 24, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art of cables at the time the invention was made to modify the cable gland of Bolante to comprise the grounding device to comprise an annular shape intermediate portion and being made of spring steel as taught by Smith because Smith teaches that such annular shape and material configuration provides a cable gland (Figs 1-5) that is simple and easy to use (Col 1, lines 64-67), as well as being easily removable from an electrical metallic tubing (Col 2, lines 1-2), while providing a secure holder for the metallic tubing, and while also providing a good electrical continuity (i.e. ground) and relative low voltage drop across the electrical tubing (Col 2, lines 29-36). and since it has been held to be within general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 and since it has been held that a change in form cannot sustain patentability where involved is only extended application of obvious attributes from a prior art. In re Span-Deck Inc. vs. Fab-Con Inc. (CA 8, 1982) 215 USPQ 835.
Claim(s) 9-10 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bolante (Pat Num 4,490,576) in view of Smith (Pat Num 8,274,000), as applied to claims 1 , 8, 11, & 16 above (herein referred to as modified Bolante), further in view of Bawa et al (Pat Num 5,059,747, herein referred to as Bawa). Modified Bolante discloses a cable gland (Figs 1-5), which is capable of assembly quickly and easily both to the cable end and an electrical box, accommodates a relatively wide range of cable sizes while providing a reasonable seal between the electrical box and an outside environment (Col 1, lines 24-31), while mechanically and electrically secures the metallic sheath of the cable to the connector (Col 2, lines 46-48).
While modified Bolante discloses the plurality of fingers (62) having a width (Fig 4), modified Bolante doesn’t necessarily disclose that each of the plurality of fingers has the maximum width along a majority of its length and a second width at a base portion adjacent to the inner edge, wherein the second width being less than the maximum width (claims 9 & 17), nor the plurality of fingers having a concave distal end (claims 10 & 18).
Bawa teaches a cable gland (Figs 1-9), which mechanically and electrically secures the metallic sheath of the cable to the connector (Col 1, lines 5-13). Specifically, with respect to claims 9 & 17, Bawa teaches a cable gland (10, Figs 1-8) comprising an entry component (12) including an inner surface with an abutment (36, Col 3, lines 36-39), a backnut (18) removably attachable to the entry component (12, Col 3, lines 42-47), a cavity (34) extending through the entry component (12) and the backnut (18, Col 3, lines 29-36) and a grounding device (14) configured to rest against the abutment (36, Col 4, lines 44-49), wherein the grounding device (14) including a rim (42), an inner edge (Fig 3), and a plurality of fingers (60) extending inward and downward from the inner edge (Fig 1), wherein the grounding device (14) is comprised of a conductive material (Col 3, lines 16-19), wherein each of the plurality of fingers (60) has the maximum width along a majority of its length and a second width at a base portion adjacent to the inner edge (Fig 1), wherein the second width being less than the maximum width (Fig 1). With respect to claims 10 & 18, Bawa teaches that each of the plurality of fingers (60) has a concave distal end (located at 62, Fig 1 & 3).
With respect to claims 9-10 and 17-18, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art of cables at the time the invention was made to modify the cable gland of modified Bolante to comprise the grounding device such that each of the plurality of fingers has the maximum width along a majority of its length and a second width at a base portion adjacent to the inner edge, wherein the second width being less than the maximum width, while the plurality of fingers have a concave distal end as taught by Bawa because Bawa teaches that such configuration provides a cable gland (Figs 1-9), which mechanically and electrically secures the metallic sheath of the cable to the connector (Col 1, lines 5-13) and since it has been held that a change in form cannot sustain patentability where involved is only extended application of obvious attributes from a prior art. In re Span-Deck Inc. vs. Fab-Con Inc. (CA 8, 1982) 215 USPQ 835.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-11, 14-20, and 22-24 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to the enclosed PTO-892 form for the citation of pertinent art in the present case, all of which disclose various cable glands for grounding electrical cables.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM H MAYO III whose telephone number is (571)272-1978. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Thurs (5:30a-3:00p) Fri 5:30a-2p (w/alternating Fridays off).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Imani Hayman can be reached on (571) 270-5528. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/William H. Mayo III/
William H. Mayo III
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2847
WHM III
December 19, 2025