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 .
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: specification does not provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter of “said junction has a convex profile, as viewed in any section plane passing through the center of the transition area” as now cited in claim 1.
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.
Claim 15 is 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 15 depends on canceled claim 3.
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 1, 5, 7, 8, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siebens (2014/0017923) in view of Raad et al. (2011/0250774).
PNG
media_image1.png
451
682
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Siebens discloses a connector for a high voltage cable, comprising a metal conductor (106) comprising a first elongated conductor element (108) having a first end, a second end, and an intermediate section between the first and second ends and a second elongated conductor element having a first end, a second end and an intermediate section between the first end and the second end; wherein the second end of the first elongated conductor element is connected to the second end of the second elongated conductor element; an insulating layer (130); and a semiconductive layer (128), wherein the insulating layer is mounted onto the second end and the intermediate section of the first elongated conductor element, the insulating layer is mounted onto the second end and the intermediate section of the second elongated conductor element; wherein the insulating layer is provided at a first insulator distance from the first end of the first elongated conductor element; wherein the insulating layer is provided a second insulator distance from the first end of the second elongated conductor element; wherein the semiconductive layer is provided outside of the insulating layer; wherein the semiconductive layer is provided at a first semiconductor distance from the first end of the first elongated conductor element; wherein the semiconductive layer is provided at a second semiconductor distance from the first end of the second elongated conductor element; wherein the first insulator distance is shorter than the first semiconductor distance, and wherein the insulating layer is a one-single insulating body; wherein a junction of adjacent edges of the first elongated conductor element and the second elongated conductor element is located in a transition area (see the above annotated Figure); and wherein the first end of the first elongated conductor element and the first end of the second elongated conductor element are configured to be connected to a high voltage cable (115) by means of a slip-on joint (126-1, 126-2, 126-3, [0020], receptacle 126 is slid fully forward) (re-claim 1).
Siebens does not disclose the junction having a convex profile, as viewed in any section plane passing through the center of the transition area (re-claim 1).
Raad et al. discloses a connector comprising first and second conductor elements (53, 54, Figs 1 and 3), wherein a junction of adjacent edges of the conductor elements is located in a transition area (55) and the junction has a convex profile with a radius, as viewed in any section plane passing through the center of the transition area (Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the transition area of Siebens to have a convex profile as taught by Raad et al. to meet the specific use of the resulting connector since it has been held that a change in shape is a matter of choice which a person ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). It is noted that since the modified junction of Siebens comprises structure and material as claimed, it can be adapted to the voltage level for the high voltage cable (re-claim 1).
Siebens, as modified, also discloses that the metal conductor comprises a third elongated conductor element having a first end, a second end and an intermediate section between the first end and the second end; wherein the second end of the third elongated conductor element is connected to the second ends of the first and second elongated conductor elements; wherein the insulating layer is mounted onto the second end and the intermediate section of the third elongated conductor element; wherein the insulating layer is provided at a third insulator distance from the first end of the third elongated conductor element; wherein the semiconductive layer is provided at a third semiconductor distance from the first end of the third elongated conductor element (re-claim 5); the first, second, and third elongated conductor elements form a y-shaped structure (re-claim 7); the intermediation sections of the first and second elongated conductor elements are located in a first plane, wherein the first end of the third elongated conductor element is located in a plane different from the first plane (re-claim 8); and the connector is a joining element for joining at least two cable sections (re-claim 15).
It has been held that the patentability of a product claim is determined by the novelty and nonobviouness of the claimed product itself without consideration of the process for making it, moulded, which is recited in the claim. In re Thorpe, 111 F. 2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966; see also In re Nordt Development Co., LLC, [2017-1445] (February 8, 2018).
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection.
Applicant argues that the bulbous portion in Raad is not a transition area, but is rather a separate portion to which two conductor pins are connected. Examiner would disagree. As seen from Figures 1-4 of Raad, first conductor element (pin end 53), second conductor element (pin end 54), and the transition area (bulbous 55) are a one-piece structure, not connected elements.
Applicant argues that Siebens would not be suitable for high-voltage cables. Examiner would disagree because Siebens does teach the connector (implementations) can be used in conjunction with high-voltage equipment ([0032]-[0033]).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAU N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1980. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 7am to 5:30pm.
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, Imani N Hayman can be reached at 571-270-5528. 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.
/CHAU N NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights