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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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(s) 1, 8, 9, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2010519707 A.
In regard to claims 1, 8, JP 2010519707 A discloses a contact pin 10 for a connector 12, comprising:
a contact wire extending between two ends,
an impedance adaptation element 14,
wherein the impedance adaptation element 14 is arranged between the two ends of the contact wire.
However, JP 2010519707 A discloses the impedance adaptation element 14 from three different disks instead of from a residual piece of a bandoleer strip and wherein at least one impedance adaptation element in the set of contact pins is shaped geometrically different than an impedance adaptation element of another contact pin in the set of contact pins.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of JP 2010519707 A by having impedance adaptation element 14 with different type of configurations since applicants have presented no explanation that these particular configurations of the impedance adaptation element 14 are significant or are anything more than one of numerous configurations a person of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for the purpose of providing impedance matching A change in shape is generally recognizing as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
In regard to claims 9, 13, JP 2010519707 A discloses plug connector 12 comprising:
a contact pin 10 including a contact wire extending between two ends and an impedance adaptation element 14, wherein the impedance adaptation element 14 is arranged between the two ends of the contact wire; and
a shielding 32 receiving the contact pin 10 as an inner conductor, wherein the shielding has a cross-sectional jump between the two ends of the contact pin along a longitudinal direction of the shielding;
wherein the impedance adaptation element 14 of the contact pin 10 is arranged in a longitudinal direction of the contact wire at a level of the cross-sectional jump of the shielding 32.
However, JP 2010519707 A discloses the impedance adaptation element 14 from three different disks instead of from a residual piece of a bandoleer strip and wherein at least one impedance adaptation element in the set of contact pins is shaped geometrically different than an impedance adaptation element of another contact pin in the set of contact pins.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of JP 2010519707 A by having impedance adaptation element 14 with different type of configurations since applicants have presented no explanation that these particular configurations of the impedance adaptation element 14 are significant or are anything more than one of numerous configurations a person of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for the purpose of providing impedance matching A change in shape is generally recognizing as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-17 are allowed.
Claims 2-7, 10-12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In regard to claims 2, 10-12, 14, the prior art fails to provide, teach or suggest the impedance adaptation element from the residual piece of the bandoleer strip comprises a holding section holding the contact wire and a mold section connected to the holding section via a material bridge. In regard to claim 15, the prior art fails to provide, teach or suggest cutting the bandoleer strip at a cut-off line in order to obtain a residual piece of the bandoleer strip fitted with the corresponding contact wire, wherein the cut-off line on the bandoleer strip runs between two contact wires arranged adjacent in a longitudinal direction of the bandoleer strip; and inserting the residual piece of the bandoleer strip fitted with the corresponding contact wire into a shielding having a cross-sectional jump.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THO D. TA whose telephone number is (571)272-2014. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4:30PM EST.
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 (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 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.
Tdt
6/23/2026
/THO D TA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights