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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Note, none of the Foreign References or Non-Patent Literature from the IDS of 30 April 2025 were considered as relevant copies of the documents were not provided.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments have overcome the Drawing Objections and 35 USC 112 rejections. Note, the Terminal Disclaimer was DISAPPROVED and the Double Patenting Rejections remain.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 23 March 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US 11,742,609 is DISAPPROVED. See the Terminal Disclaimer Review Decision of 1 April 2026.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3 and 5-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 5-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,742,609 (“the patent”) in view of Marowsky et al. (“Marowsky”; US 6,402,559).
Regarding claim 1: The patent discloses claim 1, with the exception of not explicitly disclosing a plurality of contact blades in the electrical connector housing each associated with a respective hole of the plurality of holes; and a cutting surface extending out of a flat upper face of the front end wall and positioned underneath the plurality of holes.
However, Marowsky discloses a plurality of contact blades (20, Fig. 5) in the electrical connector housing each associated with a respective hole (within 40, not labelled but show in Fig. 5) of the plurality of holes; and
a cutting surface (20) extending out of a flat upper face (26) of the front end wall and positioned underneath the plurality of holes (as underneath is relative).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the housing and holes of the patent to include the blades and cutting surface of Marowsky in order to remove the excess wire ends.
Regarding claim 2: See claim 5 of the patent.
Regarding claim 3: 72 of Marowsky discloses a stiffener.
Regarding claim 5: It is inherent the connector of the patent mates with another connector.
Regarding claims 6 and 7: Claim 5 of the patent teaches adjacent holes, which are more than one row.
Regarding claim 8: See claim 6 of the patent.
Regarding claim 9: The patent discloses claim 9, with the exception of not explicitly disclosing a plurality of contact blades in the electrical connector housing each associated with a respective hole of the plurality of holes; and a cutting surface extending out of a flat upper face of the front end wall and positioned underneath the plurality of holes.
However, Marowsky discloses a plurality of contact blades (20) in the electrical connector housing each associated with a respective hole (within 40, not labelled but show in Fig. 5) of the plurality of holes; and
a cutting surface (20) extending out of a flat upper face (26) of the front end wall and positioned underneath the plurality of holes (as underneath is relative).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the housing and holes of the patent to include the blades and cutting surface of Marowsky in order to remove the excess wire ends.
Regarding claim 10: See claim 5 of the patent.
Regarding claim 11: Given the “comprising” language Marowsky discloses one row.
Regarding claim 12: Claim 5 of the patent teaches adjacent holes, which are two rows.
Regarding claim 13: See claim 5 of the patent.
Regarding claim 14: The patent discloses claim 14, with the exception of not explicitly disclosing a plurality of slots in the housing each aligned with a respective hole of the plurality of holes and having a contact blade positioned therein; a plurality of wires each extending though the open rearward end and a respective hole of the plurality of holes and positioned below a respective contact blade; an extension portion connected to the front end wall and positioned below the plurality of holes, the extension portion is dimensioned and configured to be positioned between two opposing posts of a shearing and crimping tool in a cutting position such that the extension portion and the two opposing posts enable the wires to be cut at the same time.
However, Marowsky discloses a plurality of slots in the housing each aligned with a respective hole of the plurality of holes and having a contact blade positioned therein (each blade 20 is within a slot in Fig. 5);
a plurality of wires each extending though the open rearward end and a respective hole (within 40, unlabeled) of the plurality of holes and positioned below a respective contact blade (as shown in Fig. 5);
an extension portion connected to the front end wall and positioned below the plurality of holes, the extension portion is dimensioned and configured to be positioned between two opposing posts of a shearing and crimping tool in a cutting position such that the extension portion and the two opposing posts enable the wires to be cut at the same time (as stated above, this is rejected under 35 USC 112, however, it appears the wires of Marowsky are all cut at the same time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the housing and holes of the patent to include the blades and cutting surface of Marowsky in order to remove the excess wire ends.
Regarding claim 15: Claim 5 of the patent teaches adjacent holes, which are two rows.
Regarding claim 16: See claim 5 of the patent.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SEAN GUGGER whose telephone number is (571)272-5343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:00am - 5:00pm EST.
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, T.C. Patel can be reached at 571 272 2098. 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.
/SEAN GUGGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834