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 .
Response to Amendment
There are no amendments made to the claims of 08/28/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Wuechner does not disclose independent claims 1 and 23 limitation “a latch movably and undetchably mounted to the casing.” Wuechner discloses a latch (8, 9) and casing (Includes 1, 2, and the walls surrounding the charge socket 3). Wuechner discloses 9 is movable between locked and unlocked positions, and both 8 and 9 are undetachable from the casing, which includes 1, 2, and the walls surrounding the charge socket 3. Figures 1-3. Col.4, L16-20. Col.5, L1-5. Thus, Wuechner discloses the claimed limitations. Independent claims 1 and 23 are rejected. Applicant's argument is not persuasive.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 12-17, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Wuechner (U.S. Patent No. 5,934,918).
For claim 1, Wuechner discloses, in Figures 1-3, a security system for a vehicle connector port, comprising:
a casing (Includes 1, 2, and the walls surrounding the charge socket 3) configured to engage at least one portion of said vehicle connector port (4, 14) (Figures 1-3); and
a latch (8, 9) movably and undetachably mounted to the casing (9 is movable between locked and unlocked positions, and both 8 and 9 are undetachable from the casing, which includes 1, 2, and the walls surrounding the charge socket 3. Col.4, L16-20. Col.5, L1-5.) and configured to selectively move relative to the casing between a latched position to inhibit removal of said vehicle connector port and an unlatched position to allow removal of said vehicle connector port (The locking bar 9 engages 2 in the latched position, as in Figures 2-3. The latched position inhibits the removal of the vehicle connector port, as in Figures 2-3. In the unlatched position, the locking bar 9 releases 2, and allows the removal of the vehicle connector port by lifting the swing lid 2.)
For claim 2, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 1, wherein an access to said vehicle connector port is inhibited by an engagement of said vehicle connector port with the casing (Figures 2-3.)
For claim 12, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 1, wherein the casing comprises an interior, and wherein the interior is configured to receive the at least one portion of said vehicle connector port (4, 14, as in Figures 2-3.)
For claim 13, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 12, wherein the casing further comprises an opening that is in spatial communication with the interior (1 has an opening that communicates with the space in which the charge socket 3 is disposed. Figures 2-3.), and wherein the opening is configured to allow said vehicle connector port to move into or out of the interior (Figures 2-3.)
For claim 14, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 13, wherein in the latched position the latch (9) extends across the opening (Figure 3.)
For claim 15, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 12, wherein the casing further comprises a first lateral side wall, a second lateral side wall and a third lateral side wall, wherein the third lateral side wall is formed between the first lateral side wall and the second lateral side wall, and wherein the interior is at least partially defined by the first lateral side wall, the second lateral side wall and the third lateral side wall (The space for charge socket 3 is formed by the left side wall defining the first lateral wall, right side wall defining the second lateral wall, and the bottom wall defining the third lateral wall, as in Figure 1. The interior is at least partially defined by the first lateral side wall, the second lateral side wall and the third lateral side wall, Figures 2-3.)
For claim 16, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 12, wherein the casing further comprises at least one socket (3; Col.3, L19-20) within the interior and configured to receive and secure the at least one portion of said vehicle connector port (Figures 2-3.)
For claim 17, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 1, wherein the casing comprises a lateral side wall and a plurality of patterned apertures defined therein (Side wall on the bottom and on the right side has patterned apertures. Figure 3.)
For claim 23, Wuechner discloses, in Figures 1-3, a vehicular apparatus, comprising:
a vehicle connector port (4, 14); and
a security system comprising:
a casing (Includes 1, 2, and the walls surrounding the charge socket 3) configured to engage at least one portion of the vehicle connector port (Figures 1-3); and
a latch (8, 9) movably and undetachably mounted to the casing (9 is movable between locked and unlocked positions, and both 8 and 9 are undetachable from the casing, which includes 1, 2, and the walls surrounding the charge socket 3. Col.4, L16-20. Col.5, L1-5.) and configured to selectively move relative to the casing between a latched position to inhibit removal of the vehicle connector port and an unlatched position to allow removal of the vehicle connector port (The locking bar 9 engages 2 in the latched position, as in Figures 2-3. The latched position inhibits the removal of the vehicle connector port, as in Figures 2-3. In the unlatched position, the locking bar 9 releases 2, and allows the removal of the vehicle connector port by lifting the swing lid 2.)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 19, and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuechner (U.S. Patent No. 5,934,918) alone.
For claim 19, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 1, except for wherein the latch has a key shape. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a key shape for the latch, since a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). One skill in the art would realize that having the latch in a key shape would yield the same expected result for the intended use as with the latch of Wuechner.
For claim 21, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 1, except for wherein the latch has a barbell shape. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a barbell shape for the latch, since a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). One skill in the art would realize that having the latch in a barbell shape would yield the same expected result for the intended use as with the latch of Wuechner.
For claim 22, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 21, wherein the casing comprises a through hole, wherein the latch movably traverses through the through hole, and wherein the through hole has a circle shape matching with the barbell shape (The locking bar 9 engages a circular hole, Figures 1-3.)
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuechner (U.S. Patent No. 5,934,918) in view of Russell et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,291,002).
For claim 18, Wuechner discloses the security system of Claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the casing and the latch are manufactured by a three-dimensional printing process.
Russell et al. teaches a method for 3D printing for automotive parts (Col.1, L49-54) with precision quality. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to Wuechner with casing and latch such that the casing and the latch are manufactured by a three-dimensional printing process, as taught by Russell et al. with a reasonable expectation of success of producing quality products.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-11, and 20 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.
Conclusion
Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and provides examples of similar inventions. There are no suggestions in the prior art of record for combining any of the references to arrive at as claimed.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN CUMAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3112. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, 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, KRISTINA FULTON can be reached at 571-272-7376. 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.
/NATHAN CUMAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675