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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tan Chin Yaw et al. [US 7,628,648].
Regarding claim 1, Yaw discloses a modular connector assembly, comprising: a plurality of interconnectable bodies (fig. 9a; 32, 10), including: a first body (32) defining at least a first portion (fig. 9a; 361) of a first terminal space (fig. 9a; 361, 1402) sized to receive a terminal (fig. 9a; 34) of a first type (34 type) in a terminal insertion direction (fig. 9a; LD); and a second body (fig. 9a; 10); and a connecting element (fig. 1; 12) defined on at least one of the first body or the second body (10) and detachably connecting the first body (32) to the second body (10), the second body (10) is movable between a first position (figs. 14a-f) and a second position (figs. 16a-f) relative to the first body (32) via the connecting element (12), the connecting element (12) includes a terminal position assurance (TPA) element (figs. 8a-b; 1405), with the second body (10) in the first position (figs. 14a-f), the terminal (34) is insertable into the first terminal space (361, 1402) in the insertion direction (LD, 34 is capable of being inserted while 10 is connected in the 14a-f state), and with the second body (10) in the second position (figs. 16a-f), the TPA element (1405) is adapted to fix the terminal (35) within the first terminal space (361, 1402), the second body (10) is attached to the first body (32) in the first position (figs. 14a-f) and the second position (figs. 16a-f), the connecting element (12) has a latch (fig. 13c; 1201b2) that engages with a first recess (fig. 14b; 323) of the other of the first body (32) or the second body in the first position (figs. 14a-f) and engages with a second recess (fig. 16b; 324) of the other of the first body (32) or the second body in the second position (figs. 16a-f), the connecting element (12) moves linearly (fig. 10a; RD direction) between engagement with the first recess (323) and engagement with the second recess (324).
Regarding claim 3, Yaw discloses wherein the second body (10) defines a second portion (1402) of the first terminal space (361, 1402).
Regarding claim 16, Yaw discloses wherein the first body (32) and the second body (10) define a complementary coding (fig. 9b, 10b; 322 and 1201b3) on abutting mating surfaces (fig. 9a; 321 and fig. 1; 1201c) thereof.
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(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan Chin Yaw et al. [US 7,628,648] in view of Sekino [US 12,046,848].
Yaw discloses all of the claim limitations except wherein: with the second body in the first position, the first and second portions of the first terminal space are defined about discrete, radially offset central axes; and with the second body in the second position, the first and second portions of the first terminal space are defined about a common central axis.
However, Sekino teaches the second body (fig. 2; 5) in the first position (fig. 2; disconnected position), the first (fig. 2; 3a) and second portions (fig. 2; 50b) of the first terminal space (3a, 50) are defined about discrete, offset central axes (in the disconnected position central axis of 3a and 50b are offset because they are not aligned); and with the second body (5) in the second position (figs. 7-10; connected position), the first (3a) and second portions (50b) of the first terminal space (3a, 50b) are defined about a common central axis (see figs. 8 and 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the second body in the first position, the first and second portions of the first terminal space are defined about discrete, radially offset central axes; and with the second body in the second position, the first and second portions of the first terminal space are defined about a common central axis as suggested by Sekino for the benefit improving the process of terminal loading in order to prevent damage to the connector due to improper terminal insertion.
Claim(s) 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan Chin Yaw et al. [US 7,628,648] in view of Kida [US 2012/0225576].
Regarding claim 6, Yaw discloses all of the claim limitations except wherein the second body defines the terminal position assurance (TPA) element connecting the first body and the second body, the TPA element arranged outside of the first terminal space in the first position and arranged within the first terminal space in the second position for engaging with the terminal.
However, Kida teaches wherein the second body (fig. 3; other 10) defines the terminal position assurance (TPA) element (fig. 4; 16, 18 is also on 16) connecting the first body (one 10) and the second body (other 10), the TPA element (16) arranged outside of the first terminal space (fig. 3; 12, top surface of 16) in the first position (fig. 3; initial connection state of two 10s) and arranged within the first terminal space (fig. 3; 12, top surface of 16) in the second position (completely connected state of two 10s) for engaging with the terminal (20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the second body defines the terminal position assurance (TPA) element connecting the first body and the second body, the TPA element arranged outside of the first terminal space in the first position and arranged within the first terminal space in the second position for engaging with the terminal as suggested by Kida for the benefit of providing improved stability of a loaded terminal inside a connector.
Regarding claim 7, Yaw modified by Kida has been discussed above. Yaw discloses wherein the TPA element (1405) comprises a TPA protrusion (1405 protrudes toward 34) extending from the second body (10) toward the first body (32).
Regarding claim 8, Yaw modified by Kida has been discussed above. Yaw discloses a terminal of the first type (34) arranged within the terminal space (361, 1402), wherein with the second body (10) in the second position (figs. 16a-f), the TPA protrusion (1405 protrusion) engages with a groove (fig. 9a; groove that 343 and 342 makes) formed in the terminal (34), misalignment of the TPA protrusion (1405 protrusion) and the terminal groove (groove that 343 and 342 makes) preventing the second body (10) from moving from the first position (figs. 14a-f) into the second position (figs. 16a-f; if terminals 34 where misaligned then 10 would not be able to move from 323 to 324).
Regarding claim 9, Yaw modified by Kida has been discussed above. Yaw discloses wherein the first body (32) defines an opening (fig. 14f and 16f; right opening of 361) sized to receive the TPA protrusion (1405 protrusion) as the second body (10) is moved into the second position (figs. 16a-f).
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan Chin Yaw et al. [US 7,628,648] in view of Shuey et al. [US 9,484,660].
Yaw discloses all of the claim limitations except wherein the first body defines at least a portion of a second terminal space on a side opposite the first terminal space, the second terminal space sized to receive another terminal of the first type in the insertion direction.
However, Shuey teaches wherein the first body (104) defines at least a portion of a second terminal space (fig. 2; third row of top 142s) on a side opposite (bottom) the first terminal space (first row of top 142s), the second terminal space (third row of top 142s) sized to receive another terminal (top 108) of the first type (top 108) in the insertion direction (extension direction of 108).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the first body defines at least a portion of a second terminal space on a side opposite the first terminal space, the second terminal space sized to receive another terminal of the first type in the insertion direction as suggested by Shuey for the benefit of providing an improved connector that is able transmit a variety of signals due to the diversity of the accommodated terminals.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-22 are allowed.
Claims 12-15 are 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.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: regarding claim 17, the prior art of record fails to disclose, teach, provide or suggest a plurality of detachably connected first terminal housings, each first terminal housing defining at least a portion of a first terminal space sized to receive a terminal of a first type; and a plurality of detachably connected second terminal housings, each second terminal housing defining at least a portion of a second terminal space sized to receive a terminal of a second type, distinct from the first type; and an adapter housing detachably connecting the plurality of first terminal housings to the plurality of second terminal housings combined with the remaining limitations of the base claim.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: regarding claim 21, the prior art of record fails to disclose, teach, provide or suggest an end housing connectable to a side of the first body opposite the second body and defining a second portion of the second terminal space on a first side thereof and a planar end face on a second side thereof, opposite the first side combined with the remaining limitations of the base claim.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: regarding claim 22, the prior art of record fails to disclose, teach, provide or suggest an adapter housing connectable to a side of the first body opposite the second body and defining a second portion of the second terminal space on a first side thereof, and a first portion of a third terminal space on a second side thereof, opposite the first side, the third terminal space sized to receive a terminal of a second type, distinct from the first type, in the insertion direction combined with the remaining limitations of the base claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references 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 MARCUS E HARCUM whose telephone number is (571)272-9986. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8am-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.
/MARCUS E HARCUM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2831