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 claim 3, “an electrical circuit”, claim 14, “the feature is a notch” 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Numerals 54 and 64 should be described in the specification.
Abstract
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-15, 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 1, “a trailer” should be changed to - - a trailer connector--.
Claim 3, line 1, “claim 2,” should be changed to - - claim 2, further- -.
Claim 9, line 1, “claim 7,” should be changed to – claim 7, further--.
Claim 12, line 1, “claim 1,” should be changed to – claim 1, further--.
Claim 12, line 2, the trailer connector” has no antecedent basis.
Claim 13, line 3, “a trailer connector” should be changed to – the trailer connector--.
Claim 19, line 1, “claim 17,” should be changed to – claim 17, further--.
Claim 20, line 1, “claim 19,” should be changed to – claim 19, further--.
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, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a, 1) as being anticipated by Ruiz.
Regarding claim 1, Ruiz, see figures 1-2C, discloses a trailer tow connector 200 for vehicle in towing a trailer (see paragraph 0002) comprising: a housing 202 including a body 202 having a cavity (near to the leadline 212A) with electrical terminals 212A-212D configured to be in communication with a vehicle's electrical system, a cover 204 supported on the body 202 and movable between a closed position in which the cavity (near to the leadline 212A) is enclosed by the cover 204 and an open position in which the cavity (near to the leadline 212A) is accessible; and a light arranged in the housing 202 and configured to illuminate the electrical terminals 212A-212D with the cover 204 in the open position.
Regarding claim 16, Ruiz discloses the electrical terminals 212A-212D are provided by seven terminals or four terminals 212A-212D.
Regarding claim 17, Ruiz, see figures 1-2C, discloses a method of illuminating a trailer tow connector 200 comprising: opening a cover 204 with respect to a body 202; and illuminating electrical terminals 212A-212D within the body 202.
Regarding claim 18, Ruiz discloses the illuminating step is performed when opening a cover 204 pivotally attached to the body 202.
Regarding claim 19, Ruiz discloses comprising changing a state of illumination based upon a test result a trailer connector (see column 0002) to the electrical terminals 212A-212D. Intended use of device but no structure recited.
Regarding claim 20, Ruiz discloses comprising changing colors of an LED (see column 0012).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruiz (U. S, 2017/0100975) in view of Salter (U. S. Patent 10041650).
Regarding claim 2, Ruiz discloses the claimed invention except for the light is configured to illuminate the electrical terminals only with the cover in the open position. Salter discloses the light is configured to illuminate the electrical terminals only with the cover 30 in the open position (see paragraph 0033). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Ruiz to provide such features as taught by Salter so as to provide on and off switch so as to waste energy.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruiz (U. S, 2017/0100975) in view of Salter (U. S. Patent 10041650) and further in view of Nicola (U. S. 2008/0225515).
Regarding claim 3, Ruiz, Salter disclose the claimed invention except for comprising a switch provided in an electrical circuit with the light, the switch actuated in response to the cover moving between the open position and the closed position. Nicola discloses a switch 450 provided in an electrical circuit with the light, the switch actuated in response to the cover 430 moving between the open position and the closed position. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Ruiz and Salter to provide such feature as taught by Nicola so as to provide on and off switch so as to waste energy.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruiz (U. S, 2017/0100975) in view Salter (U. S. Patent 10041650) and Nicola (U. S. 2008/0225515) and Stack (U. S. Patent 11,424,581).
Regarding claim 4, Ruiz, Salter, Nicola, disclose the claimed invention except for the light is provided on the body. Stack discloses a light 62 is provide is provided on the body 58. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Ruiz, Salter, Nicola to provide such features as taught by Stack so as to easy for manufacture.
Regarding claim 5, Ruiz, Salter and Nicola disclose the claimed invention except for the light is provided within the cavity. Stack discloses a light 62 is provide is provided within the cavity (See figure 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Ruiz, Salter, Nicola to provide such features as taught by Stack so as to easy for manufacture.
Regarding claim 6, Ruiz discloses the light is an LED (see paragraph 0012).
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruiz (U. S, 2017/0100975) in view of Mathauser (U. S, Patent 3,808,577).
Regarding claim 12, Ruiz, discloses the claimed invention except for a magnetic guide configured to magnetically couple to a feature on the trailer connector. Mathauser discloses a magnetic guide at 25. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Ruiz to provide such features as taught by Mathauser so as to hold connectors together.
Regarding claim 13, Ruiz discloses the claimed invention except for the magnetic guide is provided on an interlocking feature of the trailer connector configured to cooperate with a complimentary feature of a trailer connector. Mathauser discloses a magnetic guide at 25. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Ruiz to provide such features as taught by Mathauser so as to hold connectors together.
Regarding claim 14, Ruiz discloses the feature is a notch. Mathauser discloses a notch at 40. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Ruiz to provide such features as taught by Mathauser so as to provide for better guiding.
Regarding claim 15, Ruiz discloses the claimed invention except for the feature is a ground terminal of the electrical terminals. Mathauser discloses the feature is a ground terminal of the electrical terminals (see column 3, lines 60-65). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Ruiz as taught by Mathauser so as to provide for better safety.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-11 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.
None of the references discloses the LED is configured to change state in response to a diagnostic test.
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