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 .
Allowance of certain claim is withdrawn in view of newly applied references.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6, line 5, objected to, should “by” be –for--.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a, 1) as being anticipated by Lu 12,500,379.
For claim 1, Lu figures 6, 10, discloses a board connector B to be fixed to a circuit board and including a first connection seat 24 that includes a first connection slot as shown a second connection seat 25 with a second slot as shown, different from the first slot and a shell 5, the connection seats surround by the metal shell. The metal shell includes a fist guide structure in figure 10 near 581, a wire connector 61, figures 17-19 configured to be inserted in the board structure 612 and wherein the first guide structure cooperates with the second guide structure when the wire connector is inserted into the board connector.
For claim 2, the first connection seat 24 may be formed to transmit power and the second connection seats arranged in a row.
For claim 3, the first guiding structure is formed by bending a metal structure 5.
For claim 4, in figure 10 a gap is shown between metal shell and the long side walls of the second connecting seat.
For claim 5, the wire connector 61 includes an insulating body with first and second connecting plates at lines 62, 63 (figure 17) and an inner limiting structure at 612, the second guide structure 612 is formed on the inner limiting structure since structure 612 acts as a guide.
For claim 6, in figure 15, first and second gaps 52-55 are formed between the metal shell and long side walls of the first and second connecting seats wherein an inner limiting structure of 612 or 613 is configured by being inserted into one of the gaps.
For claim 11, Lu figure 17, 19 applied as for claim 5. Alsoi note Lu gold figures on plate 62 and ribbon cable 65 extending from side of housing and limiting (second guide) structure 612b parallel to plate 62 and formed to match shell first guide 52 or 53 when the wire connector is inserted into the board connector.
For claims 12, 13, figure 17, each structure 612b are between plate 612 and the ribbon cable and the structure 612 are on opposite sides of plate 62.
For claim 14, Lu figure 19, includes anti-tilt structures at opposite ends, one shown near numeral 61 and perpendicular to the first plate 62.
Claim 15, Lu figure 19 includes a second connecting plate at 63, 64 in a row with the first plate.
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 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu.
For claim 16, the second plate 63, 64, includes gold finger and are not clearly shown of different width than first plate fingers Lu figure 15 shown different width contacts at 3, 4. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Lu to provide such features so as to provide to form the figure 17 contacts since some are for power and there need larger size to handle larger currents.
Lu as discussed above meets claim limitations, but should any be at issue these may be deemed obvious variants.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu in view of CN 211743448.
Lu lacks buckle and drawstring. CN has such features at 24, 30. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Lu to provide such features as taught by CN so as to enable easy disconnection.
Claims 7-8, 10 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Neil Abrams whose telephone number is (571)272-2089. 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, TC Patel can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/NEIL ABRAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights