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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a portion”; “a guide” (see claim 19 lines 11) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 19 line 7 recites: “slot of the guide; and a second electrical connector” should be
--slot of the guide; and
a second electrical connector--
claim 19 line 11 recites: “having a slot” should be --having a position slot--
Appropriate correction is required.
(Note: Applicant is reminded to recites exact terminology which has described in the Specification to prevent from confusing and antecedent basis. Therefore, Applicant should revise the claim set accordingly).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 10 line 4 recites: “a portion configured to receive a locking member of the mating connector”. Applicant just simply recites “a portion” but what is this portion and where exactly this “a portion” in order to receive a locking member of the mating connector. Further, where is this mating connector which has a locking member in order to receive by “a portion” that Applicant is recited in claim 10. Further, clarification is required.
Therefore, claims 11-18 also are rejected due to dependency. Claim 19 line 14 recites: “the slot of the guide of the second electrical connector comprises a portion”. Applicant just simply recited “a portion”, but where is this and what is this portion that Applicant is trying to claim here. Further clarification is required.
Claim 20 is also rejected due to dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 9 as best understood and is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Winey (US 10910770).
As per claim 1: Winey discloses an electrical connector 200 (as shown in fig. 2) comprising: a housing 214 comprising a body having a mating face and a mounting face (see fig. 2; wherein a connector comprises a mating interface adapted to mate with a second connector pressed towards the connector in a mating direction, the mating interface comprising: a plurality of contacts; and housing 214, forming a mounting interface, and Cage 202 has contact tails at the mounting interface of connector 200), a slot (not label, see fig. 6A-B, wherein the housing 214 has a slot, lined with contacts 212 that will engage pads of plug connector 104) extending along the body 214, and a guide 250 disposed at an end of the body 214 and having a first slot (not label, see figs. 6A-B, wherein the latching member is located within); a plurality of conductive elements 602 held by the housing 214, each of the plurality of conductive elements 602 extending from the mounting face into the slot (see figs. 6A-B, wherein housing 214 has a slot, lined with contacts 212 that will engage pads of plug connector 104); and a locking member 502/504 comprising a beam (as shown in figs. 6A-B) fixedly disposed in and curving out of the first slot of the guide (see figs. 6a-B; wherein latching members 502 and 504 have hook-shaped projections. In the embodiment illustrated, latching members 502 and 504 are coupled to connector 300. They are elongated in the mating direction A and are positioned to fit behind a side wall 250 of cage 202. Additionally, they are flexible in a direction perpendicular to the mating direction A and normal to side surface 250 of cage 202. The projections of latching members 502 and 504 have leading ends that are ramped, providing a camming surface that, when connector 300 is inserted into connector 200, causes latching members 502 and 504 to deflect away from surface 250).
As per claim 9: Winey discloses the electrical connector 200, and the locking member 502/504 is a metal member (see figs. 6A-B, wherein the locking member comprises a elongated member 620 may be formed from a springy material).
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.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winey (US 10910770) in view of Wang (US 9407022).
As per claim 7: Winey discloses the electrical connector 200, the housing 214, and the locking member 502/504. However, Winey does not explicitly disclose a board lock held by the housing, wherein the locking member and the board lock are integrated or separate.
Wang discloses a board lock 31 held by the housing (as shown in fig. 3), wherein the locking member 313 (hook) and the board lock 31 are integrated (as shown in fig. 4) in order to enhance a stability, reliability and securely locked/fastened between sub-assembly (as shown in figs. 1-2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to further modify the electrical connector of Winey by having a board lock held by the housing, wherein the locking member and the board lock are integrated in order to enhance a stability, reliability and securely locked/fastened between sub-assembly (as shown in figs. 1-2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6, and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Winey does not teach: “wherein a head portion disposed in a second slot of the guide such that the head portion is movable inside the second slot of the guide; and a joint portion protruding out of the guide”. The above noted structure in combination with other recitations within the claims is not shown by a single prior art document and the examiner knows of no reasonable rational to combine the prior art of record such that the claimed invention would have been obvious at prior to the filing of this application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANG H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0288. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Abdullah Riyami can be reached at 571-270-3119. 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.
/T.H.N/ Examiner, Art Unit 2831 /ABDULLAH A RIYAMI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2831