DETAILED ACTION
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 subject matter of this application admits of illustration by a drawing to facilitate understanding of the invention. Applicant is required to furnish a drawing under 37 CFR 1.81(c). No new matter may be introduced in the required drawing. 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).
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 “wire are connected in series” and “the spacers are connected to the ground wires” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s) 1. 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
A preliminary examination of this application reveals that it includes terminology which is so different from that which is generally accepted in the art to which this invention pertains that a proper search of the prior art cannot be made. For example: “elastic pieces 24” while it means for electrical contacts.
Applicant is required to provide a clarification of these matters or correlation with art-accepted terminology so that a proper comparison with the prior art can be made. Applicant should be careful not to introduce any new matter into the disclosure (i.e., matter which is not supported by the disclosure as originally filed).
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.
Claims 3 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 3, the limitation “two signal wires” and “two ground wires” is unclear because the wire only has “a signal wire and a ground wire” as claimed in claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Fong et al. (US 7,435,132).
Regarding claim 1, Fong et al. disclose a connector for preventing signal interference, comprising:
a connector housing (5);
a plurality of groups of wires (4) arranged in the connector housing, wherein any group of the wires comprise a signal wire (40) and a ground wire (43), and the ground wires in the plurality of groups of the wires are connected in series; and
a metal partition plate (6), wherein
a plurality of spacers (62) are arranged on the metal partition plate, the spacers are positioned on both sides of the wires to separate two adjacent groups of the wires, and the spacers are connected to the ground wires.
Regarding claim 5, Fong et al. disclose an insulating protective sleeve (3), and the insulating protective sleeve covers ends of the wires.
Regarding claim 6, Fong et al. disclose the insulating protective sleeve is provided as a plastic one-piece molded structure.
Regarding claim 7, Fong et al. disclose the metal partition plate is mounted on the insulating protective sleeve, and the insulating protective sleeve is provided with a slot for the spacer to pass through (see Fig. 3).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Chua et al. (US 2023/0127481).
Regarding claim 1, Chua et al. disclose a connector for preventing signal interference, comprising:
a connector housing (30);
a plurality of groups of wires (40) arranged in the connector housing, wherein any group of the wires comprise a signal wire (402) and a ground wire (406), and the ground wires in the plurality of groups of the wires are connected in series; and
a metal partition plate (6, 68), wherein
a plurality of spacers (680) are arranged on the metal partition plate, the spacers are positioned on both sides of the wires to separate two adjacent groups of the wires, and the spacers are connected to the ground wires.
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 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fong et al. (US 7,435,132).
Regarding claim 2, Fong et al. substantially disclosed the claimed invention except the material of the metal partition plate is provided as a copper or stainless steel one-piece molded structure.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a material as copper or stainless steel for minimizing magnetic interference, since it has been held that to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chua et al. (US 2023/0127481).
Regarding claim 3, Chua et al. substantially disclosed the claimed invention except the ground wire includes two ground wires are separated from the signal wire by an insulating medium, and the two signal wires are respectively connected to elastic pieces (66) that are connected to a PCB motherboard (1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to duplicate the ground wire, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 4, in the modified connector, Chua et al. disclose the wires are arranged in a straight line, and the ground wires in two adjacent groups of the wires are connected.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRUC T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2011. The examiner can normally be reached monday-friday (7-4).
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, Christopher M. Koehler can be reached at 5712723560. 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.
/TRUC T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834