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 .
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.
Claim 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Raybold (US 2023/0056542 A1).
Regarding claim 16: Raybold (Figures 1-3) teaches a method of securing a flat cable to a terminal, including: providing a connector housing (i.e. 200), including:
a first side (i.e. 220) including a first opening (i.e. accepting 20); a second side (i.e. 212) including a second opening (i.e. receiving mating terminal pin); a connector housing body (i.e. 210) including a cavity (i.e. 214) extending between the first opening and the second opening, and an aperture (i.e. 268) extending through a bottom surface (i.e. 260) of the connector housing body; providing a welding element (i.e. 42);
inserting the terminal into the connector housing, the terminal including a first conductive contact region (i.e. 130);
inserting the flat cable into the connector housing, the flat cable including a second conductive contact region (i.e. 40);
creating mechanical contact between the second conductive contact region and the first conductive contact region; and
welding the second conductive contact region of the flat cable to the first conductive contact region of the terminal through the aperture of the connector housing (i.e. as in paragraph [0063]).
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 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raybold and Pabst (US 7367837).
Regarding claim 20: Raybold (Figures 1-3) teaches the method of claim 16, further comprising:
providing a mating device (i.e. for mating with the mating end 110).
but does not specifically teach the mating device including an opening and a third planar surface; and
inserting the connector housing into the opening of the mating device, wherein the third planar surface covers the aperture of the connector housing.
PNG
media_image1.png
516
679
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Raybold (see marked version of figure 1 below) does teach slots in the sidewall configured to receive a mating housing up to a stop point (i.e. PR) which is past the apertures. This appears to anticipate a mating housing covering the apertures.
PNG
media_image2.png
428
728
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, Pabst (see marked version of figure 1 below) teaches the mating device (i.e. M) including an opening (i.e. O) and a third planar surface (i.e. S); and inserting the connector housing (i.e. 3) into the opening of the mating device.
As seen in Pabst, the mating device covers the connector up to a stop (i.e. P). Therefore, while a third planar surface covering the aperture appears to be an intended feature of Raybold’s method already, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the mating device taught by Raybold with the third planar surface which covers the aperture of the connector housing so as to block access to the welds when the connector is in use.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 1, applicant’s arguments are persuasive and the prior art of record does not fairly teach or suggest a planar first conductive region adjacent to a tanged portion and a stuffer.
Regarding claim 12, applicant’s arguments are persuasive and the prior art of record does not fairly teach or suggest a deflectable biasing member and a plurality of apertures alone or in obvious combination.
Claims 17-19 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not fairly teach or suggest the method of claim 16, further comprising providing a stuffer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 16 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gregory Mangot whose telephone number is 703-756-5737. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm ET.
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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at 571-272-3560. 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.
/GREGORY L MANGOT/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights