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
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a, 1) as being anticipated by Hirayama (U. S. Patent 9,397,431).
Regarding claim 1, Hirayama discloses a connector 3 for battery packs, the connector 3 comprising a housing 5, 6 to which a terminal pin 4 configured to serve as an electrical connection path is mounted, wherein the housing 5, 6 comprises: a lower end portion 6 to which the terminal pin 4 is coupled; and a main body portion 5 having a partition wall portion 35 extending around the lower end portion 6 and configured to prevent deformation of the terminal pin 4 when an external terminal is coupled to the terminal pin 4, the lower end portion 6 being mounted to the main body portion 5, and wherein the lower end portion 6 and the main body portion 5 are made of different materials.
Regarding claim 2, Hirayama discloses the main body portion 5 comprises a high heat-resistant material.
Regarding claim 5, Hirayama, see figures 2A-4B, discloses a planar size of the lower end portion 6 is equal to a planar size of an interior of the main body portion 5.
Regarding claim 6, Hirayama discloses the lower end portion 6 has a protrusion 45 projecting outwards from at least a part of an outer periphery of the lower end portion 6 thereof, the main body portion 5 defines a recess 33 extending into a part thereof to which the protrusion is mounted, and the protrusion is inserted into the recess 33, so that the lower end portion 6 is fixed to the main body portion 5.
Regarding claim 7, Hirayama discloses the lower end portion 6 comprises a plastic material having a lower melting point than a material comprising the main body portion 5.
Regarding claim 8, Hirayama discloses the terminal pin 4 is coupled to the lower end portion 6 by injection molding (column 13, lines 50-66).
Regarding claims 9, 10, Hirayama discloses the connector 3 is a low-voltage connector.
Regarding claim 11, Hirayama discloses the method comprising:
(a) locating the terminal pin 4 in a mold (column 13, lines 50-67);
(b) adding an injection material (column 13, lines 50-67) to the mold to form the lower end portion 6; and
(c) coupling the lower end portion 6 having the terminal pin 4 coupled thereto to the main body portion 5.
Regarding claim 12, Hirayama discloses a planar size of the lower end portion 6 is equal to a planar size of an interior of the main body portion 5, and step (c) the coupling is performed by interference fitting.
Regarding claim 13, Hirayama discloses the lower end portion 6 has a protrusion 45 projecting outwards from at least a part of an outer periphery thereof, the main body portion 5 defines a recess 33 extending into a part thereof to which the protrusion is mounted, and the coupling is performed by inserting the protrusion into the recess.
Regarding claim 14, Hirayama discloses the method comprising:
(a) pouring an injection material (see column, lines 50-67) into a mold to form the lower end portion 6;
(b) coupling the terminal pin 4 to the lower end portion 6; and
(c) coupling the lower end portion 6 having the terminal pin 4 coupled thereto to the main body portion 5.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirayama in view of Eguchi (U. S. 2014/0326207).
Regarding claim 3, Hirayama discloses the claimed invention except for the high heat-resistant material is a metal or ceramic coated with a urethane-based or inorganic-based material, and the metal is a stainless steel-based metal. Eguchi discloses the high heat-resistant material is a metal (see paragraph 0095). It would have been obvious to ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Hirayama to provide such features as taught by Eguchi so as to provide for best material.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirayama.
Regarding claim 4, Hirayama discloses the claimed invention except for the high heat-resistant material has a melting point of 1,000°C or higher. It would have been obvious to ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Hirayama to provide such features so as to provide for optimum range for each application. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONG K DINH whose telephone number is (571)272-2090. The examiner can normally be reached M-F from 8:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Riyami A Abdullah 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.
/PHUONG K DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831