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 § 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 21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gebhardt (US 12288955), Mestechnik (DE202006005060), and Lin (US 2018/0166802 A1).
Regarding claim 21: Gebhardt (Figures 2, 3, and 6) teaches a conductor terminal comprising: a spring-force clamping connection (i.e. connection of figure 6) to clamp an electrical conductor via a spring force, the spring-force clamping connection comprising:
a holder (i.e. 110); a clamping spring (i.e. 111) comprising a clamping leg (i.e. 113) for clamping the electrical conductor on a clamping surface (i.e. surface of 114), a spring bend (i.e. between 112 and 113), and a contact leg (i.e. 112) for fastening and supporting the clamping spring against a clamping force applied by the clamping leg to the electrical conductor, the clamping leg being connected to the contact leg via the spring bend, and the contact leg being fixed to the holder; and
an actuating area (i.e. 119a) formed on the clamping spring, the actuating area adapted to deflect the clamping leg by manually actuating the actuating area, the clamping leg extending from the spring bend to a free end (i.e. 118) of the clamping spring in a longitudinal direction, and the actuating area being arranged eccentrically to the clamping leg in a width direction of the clamping leg, which is orthogonal to the longitudinal direction,
but does not specifically teach wherein the clamping spring has an embossed bead, the embossed bead being arranged eccentrically to the clamping leg in the width direction of the clamping leg, such that, with respect to the width direction, the embossed bead is arranged on a same side of the clamping leg as the actuating area.
however, Mestechnik (Figure 4) teaches wherein the clamping spring has an embossed bead (i.e. bead on front nose of 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide an embossed bead to Gebhardt’s clamping spring as taught by Mestechnik so as to reinforce the clamping spring.
While Gebhardt and Mestechnik do not teach the embossed bead being arranged eccentrically to the clamping leg in the width direction of the clamping leg, such that, with respect to the width direction, the embossed bead is arranged on a same side of the clamping leg as the actuating area,
Lin (Figure 5) teaches a trough section (i.e. 326), the trough section being arranged eccentrically to the clamping leg (i.e. 323) in the width direction of the clamping leg, such that, with respect to the width direction, the trough section is arranged on a same side of the clamping leg as the actuating area (i.e. as in figure 5).
Because the embossed bead taught by Mestechnik and the trough taught by Lin each act to reinforce their respective clamping legs, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the clamping leg taught by Gebhardt and Mestechnik to have the embossed bead be arranged eccentrically as taught by Lin so as to precisely reinforce the desired portion of the clamping leg.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Applicant’s arguments are persuasive and the prior art of record does not fairly teach or suggest wherein the holder has a contact edge for contact with the contact leg, the contact leg abutting a contact projection of the contact edge at only one point at least in an unactuated position of the clamping spring.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 21 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
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 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