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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the requirement for unity of invention in the reply filed on 7/6/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-18 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/6/26.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the Abstract is longer than 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: --PORT ENTRY ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR WITH SEALING ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT O-RINGS OR THREADED FASTENERS--.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-12 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 1 line 5, the phrase “communicating an environment” should read –communicating with an environment--. Claims 2-12 include all the limitations of claim 1 and are objected to for the same reasons. In claim 2 line 2, the phrase “cylindrical wall as an” should read –cylindrical wall has an--. In claim 10 line 1, the phrase “cross sectional” should read –cross-sectional--. Claims 11-12 include all the limitations of claim 10 and are objected to for the same reason. Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kazumi et al. (JP2004063136A).
With regard to claim 1, Kazumi teaches, as shown in figures 4-8 and taught in paragraphs 6-7 of the translation: “A ported cable device 1 comprising: an enclosed housing 2; a port 4 formed in a wall of said housing 2, said port 4 having a first cylindrical wall (outer wall of 4 in figure 8) with a conductive inner thread (shown below) formed on an inner surface of said first cylindrical wall, and a hole (interior of 4 in figure 4) communicating an environment, exterior to said housing 2, with a space (where 12 is disposed in 2 in figure 5) within said housing 2; a mounting member 12 attached to an interior of said housing 2, proximate said port 4; and a receiving chamber 4b and 26 attached to said mounting member 12, said receiving chamber having an opening (where 4a is extended into the receiving chamber in figure 4) aligned with said hole (opening in left end of 4a in figure 4) within said port 4 to receive a center conductor of a male coaxial connector (connector mating with 4, as described in paragraphs 6-7) which is inserted through said hole in said port 4, and said receiving chamber 26 also including at least one frictional member 4a formed of a conductive material to frictionally engage and establish an electrical connection to a sidewall of the center conductor of the male connector, wherein when the male connector is connected to said port 4, the connection is weather-tight (taught in paragraph 6)”.
PNG
media_image1.png
556
804
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 3, Kazumi teaches: “The device according to claim 1”, as shown above.
Kazumi teaches, as shown in figures 4-8 and taught in paragraph 9 of the translation: “wherein said mounting member 12 is a circuit board”.
With regard to claim 4, Kazumi teaches: “The device according to claim 3”, as shown above.
Kazumi teaches, as shown in figures 4-8 and taught in the Abstract: “further comprising: circuitry forming a filter, surge arrestor, amplifier, splitter (taught in the Abstract), combiner or electrical-to-optical convertor provided on said circuit board 12 and electrically connected to said at least one frictional member 4a”.
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.
Claims 2, 5, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kazumi et al. (JP2004063136A).
With regard to claim 2, Kazumi teaches: “The device according to claim 1”, as shown above.
Kazumi also teaches, as shown in figures 4-8 and taught in paragraphs 6-7 of the translation: “wherein said hole within said port 4 is centered on a central axis of said first cylindrical wall of said port 4”.
Kazumi does not specifically teach: “wherein said first cylindrical wall as an inner diameter of about 5/8 inch, and wherein said inner thread is formed with a pitch of 24 threads per linear inch along a line parallel to said central axis”. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the size of the first cylindrical wall to have a diameter of about 5/8 inch in order to connect with different sized connectors. Also, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Also, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the shape of the inner thread to have a pitch of 24 threads per linear inch along a line parallel to said central axis in order to accommodate only the correct mating connector. Also, a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
With regard to claim 5, Kazumi teaches: “The device according to claim 3”, as shown above.
Kazumi also teaches, as shown in figures 4-8: “wherein said receiving chamber 26… has a hollow core (where 4a is received in 26 in figure 4) with said opening (left end of the hollow core in figure 4) formed at one end of said receiving chamber 26”.
Kazumi does not specifically teach: “wherein said receiving chamber is tube-like in shape and”. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the shape of the receiving chamber to be a tube-like shape in order to surround the frictional member. Also, a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
With regard to claim 10, Kazumi teaches: “The device according to claim 5”, as shown above.
Kazumi does not specifically teach: “wherein a cross sectional shape of said receiving chamber is either substantially rectangular or substantially circular”. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the shape of the cross sectional shape of the receiving chamber to be substantially rectangular or circular in order to better accommodate a contact with a circular or rectangular cross section. Also, a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Claims 6-9 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kazumi et al. (JP2004063136A) in view of Lin et al. (2004/0106304).
With regard to claim 6, Kazumi teaches: “The device according to claim 5”, as shown above.
Kazumi also teaches, as shown in figures 4-8 and taught in paragraph 8: “further comprising: an insulation material surrounding at least a portion of said receiving chamber 26”.
Kazumi does not teach: “and an electromagnetic shield surrounding at least a portion of said insulation material”.
In the same field of endeavor before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, Lin teaches, as shown in figure 1: “and an electromagnetic shield 10 surrounding at least a portion of said insulation material 12”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the features of Lin with the invention of Kazumi in order to extend the shielding of a cable to the cable connector (Lin, paragraph 19).
With regard to claim 7, Kazumi as modified by Lin teaches: “The device according to claim 6”, as shown above.
Lin also teaches, as shown in figure 4 and taught in paragraph 21: “wherein said shield 10 includes plural ground tabs 102 which extend into said circuit board 17 to mechanically secure said shield 10 to said circuit board 17 and to electrically connect said shield 10 to a ground plane (ground traces taught in paragraph 21) of said circuit board”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the features of Lin with the invention of Kazumi as modified by Lin in order to connect the shield to the ground (Lin, paragraph 21).
With regard to claim 8, Kazumi as modified by Lin teaches: “The device according to claim 7”, as shown above.
Lin also teaches, as shown in figure 1 and taught in paragraph 21: “wherein said insulation material 12 is formed… to surround said receiving chamber (where 14 is received in figure 1) and space said receiving chamber from said shield 10”.
Lin does not teach the insulation material formed: “as first and second half shells, and wherein said first and second half shells mate”. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the insulation material from two half shells instead of a single housing in order to be able to close the insulation material around the center conductor. Also, it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlicnrnan, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
With regard to claim 9, Kazumi as modified by Lin teaches: “The device according to claim 6”, as shown above.
Kazumi also teaches, as shown in figures 4-8: “wherein the insulation material forms a conical shape (shown below) to guide the center conductor of the male connector into said opening and said receiving chamber”.
PNG
media_image2.png
556
804
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 19, Kazumi teaches, as shown in figures 4-8 and taught in paragraphs 6-7 of the translation: “A coaxial connection device comprising: a ported cable device 1 including: an enclosed housing 2; a port 4 formed in a wall of said housing 2, said port 4 having a first cylindrical wall (outer wall of 4 in figure 8) with a conductive inner thread (shown below) formed on an inner surface of said first cylindrical wall, and a hole (interior of 4 in figure 4) communicating an environment, exterior to said housing 2, with a space (where 12 is disposed in 2 in figure 5) within said housing 2; a mounting member 12, in the form of a circuit board, attached to an interior of said housing 2, proximate said port 4; a tube-like receiving chamber 4b and 26 with an opening (where 4a is extended into the receiving chamber in figure 4) at one end of said receiving chamber aligned with said hole within said port 4 to receive a center conductor of a male coaxial connector (connector mating with 4, as described in paragraphs 6-7) which is inserted through said hole in said port 4, said receiving chamber having at least one frictional member 4a formed of a conductive material to frictionally engage and establish an electrical connection to a sidewall of said center conductor of said male coaxial connector; a first RF tab 13a attached to said circuit board being electrically connected to said at least one frictional member 4a of said receiving chamber; an insulation material 26 surrounding at least a portion of said receiving chamber… and said male coaxial connector including: said center conductor; a second cylindrical wall having a conductive outer thread (portion of the male coaxial connector engaging the conductive inner thread shown below) formed on an outer surface of said second cylindrical wall… and wherein said outer thread of said second cylindrical wall is conductively engaged to said inner thread of said first cylindrical wall of said port 4, and wherein a connection between said male connector and said port 4 is weather-tight (taught in paragraph 6)”.
PNG
media_image1.png
556
804
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kazumi does not teach: “an electromagnetic shield surrounding at least a portion of said insulation material, and plural ground tabs attached to said circuit board, each ground tab being electrically connected to said shield” or the male coaxial connector having “a dielectric material between said center conductor and said second cylindrical wall”.
In the same field of endeavor before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, Lin teaches, as shown in figure 4 and taught in paragraph 21: “an electromagnetic shield 10 surrounding at least a portion of said insulation material 12, and plural ground tabs 102 attached to said circuit board 17, each ground tab 102 being electrically connected to said shield 10” and the male coaxial connector 18 having “a dielectric material 182 between said center conductor 181 and said second cylindrical wall 183”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the features of Lin with the invention of Kazumi as modified by Lin in order to connect the shield to the ground (Lin, paragraph 21).
With regard to claim 20, Kazumi as modified by Lin teaches: “The device according to claim 19”, as shown above.
Neither Kazumi nor Lin teach: “wherein said first cylindrical wall as an inner diameter of about 5/8 inch, and wherein said inner thread is formed with a pitch of 24 threads per linear inch along a line parallel to said central axis”. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the size of the first cylindrical wall to have a diameter of about 5/8 inch in order to connect with different sized connectors. Also, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Also, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the shape of the inner thread to have a pitch of 24 threads per linear inch along a line parallel to said central axis in order to accommodate only the correct mating connector. Also, a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kazumi et al. (JP2004063136A) in view of Hopper (5,993,271).
With regard to claim 11, Kazumi teaches: “The device according to claim 10”, as shown above.
Kazumi does not teach: “wherein said at least one frictional member includes plural friction tabs formed from a wall or plural walls of said receiving chamber, wherein said friction tabs are bent inwardly to engage the sidewall of the center conductor, as the center conductor is inserted into said receiving chamber”.
In the same field of endeavor before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, Hopper teaches, as shown in figure 8 and taught in column 3 lines 53-63: “wherein said at least one frictional member 40’ includes plural friction tabs 49 formed from a wall or plural walls of said receiving chamber (between 49 in figure 8), wherein said friction tabs 49 are bent inwardly to engage the sidewall of the center conductor taught in column 3 lines 53-63, as the center conductor is inserted into said receiving chamber”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the features of Hopper with the invention of Kazumi in order to provide secure connection to the mating center conductor (Hopper, column 3 lines 39-43).
With regard to claim 12, Kazumi teaches: “The device according to claim 10”, as shown above.
Kazumi does not teach: “wherein said receiving chamber has at least one expansion fold, and said opening of said receiving chamber has a diameter which is slightly less than a diameter of the center conductor to be inserted into said receiving chamber, and wherein the center conductor expands said opening of said receiving chamber by expanding said at least one expansion fold so as to enlarge said receiving chamber and cause portions of inner sidewalls of said receiving chamber to function as said least one frictional member to frictionally engage, and establish electrical contact with, the outer surface of the center conductor”.
In the same field of endeavor before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, Hopper teaches, as shown in figure 8 and taught in column 3 lines 53-63: “wherein said receiving chamber (between 49 in figure 8) has at least one expansion fold (between 49 in the narrowest portion in figure 8), and said opening (formed at the bottom end of 49 in figure 8) of said receiving chamber has a diameter which is slightly less than a diameter of the center conductor (taught in column 3 lines 53-63) to be inserted into said receiving chamber, and wherein the center conductor expands said opening of said receiving chamber by expanding said at least one expansion fold so as to enlarge said receiving chamber and cause portions of inner sidewalls 49 of said receiving chamber to function as said least one frictional member to frictionally engage, and establish electrical contact with, the outer surface of the center conductor”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the features of Hopper with the invention of Kazumi in order to provide secure connection to the mating center conductor (Hopper, column 3 lines 39-43).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN M KRATT whose telephone number is (571)270-0277. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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 A 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.
/JUSTIN M KRATT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights