DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Claims 10-14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 10, the limitation of a system “for high-voltage technology” is indefinite. Whether or not a given voltage would or would not be considered to be “high voltage” would be a matter of opinion. It is unknown what voltage(s) would or would not be considered to be “high voltage” as opposed to “non-high voltage.” The limitation is given little weight.
The same rejection applies to claim 13. The limitation of being “high-voltage contact elements” is indefinite because it is unknown what voltage would or would not be considered to be “high voltage.”
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 anticipatory rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 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.
(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 1-5, 7, 8, 9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wierzchon US 6125526.
Per claim 1, Wierzchon discloses an arrangement for connecting a first electrical conductor to a second electrical conductor, said connection arrangement comprising;
a first fastening element (32) that can be inserted into an aperture 26 defined in the first electrical conductor (14) and the first fastening element has a support surface (at 30) with which the first fastening element is supported on a side (30) of the first electrical conductor facing away from the second electrical conductor (12); and
a second fastening element (37) which has a support surface with which it can be the second fastening element is supported on a side of the second electrical conductor facing away from the first electrical conductor; and wherein the first fastening element and the second fastening element, when in a screwed together state, form a common primary threaded
connection (at threads of nut 37) that connects the first electrical conductor frictionally and electrically to the second electrical conductor; and
wherein the first fastening element has a mechanical connection
interface (threads 28) for a captive connection to the first electrical conductor;
and the mechanical connection interface of the first fastening element forms a secondary threaded connection (at threads 28)) to the first electrical conductor for captive connection of the first fastening element within the aperture defined in the first electrical
conductor.
Per claim 2, the first fastening element is . . .
or
the first fastening element is bolt-shaped and the first fastening element has a primary external thread (at 42) for the common primary threaded connection to the second fastening element, and wherein
the primary external thread of the bolt-shaped first fastening element extends at least partially along an end portion of the first fastening element which protrudes from an aperture (64) defined in the second electrical conductor on a side of the second electrical conductor facing away from the first electrical conductor.
Per claim 3 the first fastening element has a shank portion (34) which extends
from the support surface of the first fastening element into the aperture defined in the first electrical conductor, and the shank portion has the mechanical connection interface (threads 28) for making the captive connection of the first fastening element to the first electrical conductor within the aperture defined in the first electrical conductor.
Per claim 4, the mechanical connection interface of the first fastening element does not emerge from the aperture defined in the first electrical conductor on the side of the first electrical conductor facing the second electrical conductor when the support surface of the first fastening element is supported on the first electrical conductor.
Per claim 5, the directions of rotation of the secondary threaded connection and the primary threaded connection are opposite to each other.
Per claim 7 the first fastening element and the second fastening element each define a mechanical interface (hexagonal head/shape) for connection to a screwing tool in order to transmit a torque from the screwing tool to the respective fastening element.
Per claim 8. Wierzchon discloses an arrangement for connecting (i.e., capable of connecting) a first electrical conductor to a second electrical conductor, wherein the first fastening element, and the second fastening element are each formed from a material that has a higher mechanical strength than the first electrical conductor or a higher mechanical strength than the second electrical conductor (neither of which are positively claimed elements).
Per claim 9, the second fastening element is . . .
or
the second fastening element 37 is designed as a screw nut which
can be screwed onto a primary external thread defined by the first fastening element protruding from an aperture 64 defined in the second electrical conductor when the first fastening element is received in the aperture 26 defined in the first electrical conductor.
Per claim 16, the same type of mechanical interface is provided in both the first
fastening element (6) and in the second fastening element.
Claim Rejections - and 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 6, 17, 10, 11, 12,13, 18, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Wierzchon.
Regarding claim 6, Wierzchon does not explicitly disclose that the first fastening element has a “self-tapping” thread at threads 28. Inherently, the threads can be considered to be “self-tapping” to some extent given that whether or not the threads will function as “self-tapping” would depend on the relative hardnesses of the bolt and first conductor and the insertion force used on the bolt. Regardless, the examiner takes Official notice that “self-tapping” threads are well known in the art. It would have been obvious to form the Wierzchon threads at 28 as “self-tapping” threads as was known in the art. The reason would have been to allow the bolt to be threaded into a non-threaded bore of the first conductor as was well known in the art.
Regarding claim 17, Wierzchon does not explicitly state the first fastening element or the second fastening element is formed of steel. The examiner takes Official notice that it was well known in the art to make fasteners as taught in Wierzchon out of steel. It would have been obvious to do so. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended purpose would have been obvious. Sinclair & Carroll Col. V. Interchemical Corp., 65 USPQ 297 (1945); In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197 (CCPA 1960).
Per claim 10, Wierzchon discloses a connection system, comprising;
a first electrical (implicitly) conductor (14);
a second electrical implicitly conductor (12): and
a connection arrangement for connecting the first electrical conductor to the second electrical conductor, the connection arrangement having,
a first fastening element (32) that can be inserted into an aperture (26) defined in the first electrical conductor and the first fastening element has a support surface (at 30) with which the first fastening element is supported on a side 30 of the first electrical conductor facing away from the second electrical conductor and
a second fastening element (37) which has a support surface with which the second fastening element is supported on a side of the second electrical conductor facing away from the first electrical conductor; and wherein
the first fastening element and the second fastening element, when in a screwed together state, form a common primary threaded connection (at threads of nut 37) that connects the first electrical conductor frictionally and electrically to the second electrical conductor and wherein
the first fastening element has a mechanical connection interface (threads 28) for a captive connection to the first electrical conductor; and
the mechanical connection interface of the first fastening element forms a secondary threaded connection to the first electrical conductor for captive connection of the first fastening element within the aperture defined in the first electrical conductor and
the first fastening element is inserted into the aperture defined in the first electrical conductor and is connected to the second fastening element via the common primary threaded
connection.
To the extent that Wierzchon does not explicitly state that the structural elements 12 and 14 (brake master cylinder and brake booster) are conductive, the examiner takes Official notice that such structural elements were known in the art to be made of metals (e.g., steel) which are inherently conductive. It would have been obvious to do so. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended purpose would have been obvious. Sinclair & Carroll Col. V. Interchemical Corp., 65 USPQ 297 (1945); In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197 (CCPA 1960).
Pe claim 11, the aperture defined in the first electrical conductor is arranged
coaxially to an aperture defined in the second electrical conductor, through which the first fastening element or the second fastening element extends.
Per claim 12, the aperture defined in the first electrical conductor or an aperture defined in the second electrical conductor are formed (inherently) as a round through-hole.
Per claim 13 an electrical contact surface on both the first electrical conductor and on the second electrical conductor and the electrical contact surface is on a side of each respective electrical conductor facing the other electrical conductor and the electrical contact surface provides mutual connection for current transmission; and
the first electrical conductor and the second electrical conductor are each inherently “high-voltage” contact elements.
Regarding claim 18 first electrical conductor and the second electrical conductor are each inherently “designed as,”, i.e., capable of being used as, a busbar or as a cable lug.
Per claim 15, Wierzchon implicitly discloses a method for connecting a first electrical
conductor (14) to a second electrical conductor (12), comprising the steps: at
least the following method steps:
providing a first fastening element (32) that has a support surface and a mechanical connection interface (28) for a captive connection to the first electrical conductor; and
inserting the first fastening element into an aperture (26) defined in the first electrical conductor until the captive connection of the first fastening element to the first electrical conductor is established (figure 4);
providing a second fastening element 37 that has a support surface; and screwing the second fastening element to the first fastening element via a common primary threaded connection until the support surface of the second fastening element is supported on a side of the second electrical conductor facing away from the first electrical conductor, and the first electrical conductor and the second electrical conductor, are frictionally and electrically connected. To the extent that any of the steps may be implicit rather than explicitly set out, such steps would have been obvious given the disclosure.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wierzchon in view of Goto et al. US 2002/0176739 (“Goto”). Wierzchon does not disclose a sleeve between the conductors. Goto discloses sleeve 13 between sheet metal elements 11. It would have been obvious to locate a coaxial sleeve between the Wierzchon elements 12 and 14, as taught in Goto. The reason would have been to space the elements (12 and 14) apart as was well known in the art. Note that although the Wierzchon arrangement is disclosed in the context of a master cylinder and brake booster, the fastening arrangement of using a bolt and nut to hold two elements (12 and 14 in Wierzchon) together is well known across all engineering and electrical and mechanical arts and everyday common usage. Therefore the Wierzchon fastening arrangement is in no way limited that particular context because the use of nuts and bolts to hold workpieces together is a well-known practice. Likewise, the arrangement of a sleeve, as taught in Goto, between elements to space the elements would have been obvious in any context, not only the context disclosed in Goto. Regarding the sleeve being conductive it would have been obvious to make the sleeve out of metals, which are inherently conductive, for example because of the well-known structural properties of such metals. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended purpose would have been obvious. Sinclair & Carroll Col. V. Interchemical Corp., 65 USPQ 297 (1945); In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197 (CCPA 1960).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROSS GUSHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2005. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 8:30 - 5:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher Koehler can be reached on 571-272-3560. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ROSS N GUSHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834