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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Article is missing in “…the funnel portion is configured to be at a first end of [sic] cavity.” For examination purposes, the examiner has interpreted the article to be “the,” referring to the cavity set forth in claim 2, of which claim 3 depends on. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: Article is missing in “The tool of claim 8, wherein [sic] receiving portion comprises…” For examination purposes, the examiner has interpreted the article to be “the,” referring to the receiving portion set forth in claim 1, of which claim 10 depends on. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-15 are 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 1 cites “a securing member configured to secure the funnel portion relative to the electrical contact when located in the receiving portion.” However, it is not clear if the securing member is configured to secure the funnel portion relative to the electrical contact when the securing member or the electrical contact is located in the receiving portion. For examination purposes, the examiner has interpreted this claim as the securing member being configured to secure the funnel portion relative to the electrical contact when the electrical contact is located in the receiving portion. Claims 2-13 are dependents of Claim 1 and contain all the features of their independent claim and fail to resolve the deficiencies of Claim 1; therefore they are rejected for the same reasons as above. Claims 14 and 15 reference Claim 1 and contain all the features of the independent claim and fail to resolve the deficiencies of Claim 1; therefore they are rejected for the same reasons as above.
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.
(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, 7-10, 12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being obvious by Melni (US 8,771,000; published 7/8/2014 and filed 8/21/2012).
Regarding claim 1, Melni teaches a handheld wire insertion tool for inserting conductive wires of a cable into an electrical contact (Abstract, connector 100 is a tool for inserting conductive wires into spiral unit 120 shown in Figs. 12-13), the tool comprising:
a receiving portion configured to receive an electrical contact (shown in annotated Fig. 12 below to receive spiral unit 120);
a funnel portion configured to guide free ends of conductive wires of a cable into the electrical contact when the contact is located in the receiving portion (annotated Fig. 12 below and traced out by dotted lines in Fig. 13);
and a securing member configured to secure the funnel portion relative to the electrical contact when located in the receiving portion (the end sleeve 122 is configured to secure the funnel portion relative to the spiral unit when the spiral unit is located in end sleeve 121).
PNG
media_image1.png
615
810
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Melni further discloses the receiving portion and the securing member are configured to inter-engage so as to form a cavity therebetween for receiving the contact (the end sleeves 121 and 122 are configured to inter-engage via the central sleeve to form a cavity therebetween for receiving the spiral unit; Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 3, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated. Melni further discloses that when the receiving portion and the securing member are inter-engaged, the funnel portion is configured to be at a first end of the cavity (when the end sleeves 121 and 122 are inter-engaged, the funnel portion is configured to be at a first end of the cavity; shown in annotated Fig. 13 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
443
568
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated. Melni further discloses that the securing member comprises a first opening and a second opening smaller than the first opening (shown in annotated Fig. 13 above), and wherein, when the receiving portion and the securing member are inter-engaged, the second opening is at a second end of the cavity opposite to the first end of the cavity (shown in annotated Fig. 13 above, wherein receiving portion on 121 and securing member 122 are inter-engaged).
Regarding claim 5, Melni discloses in a second embodiment, connector 800 depicted in Fig. 38C, a handheld wire insertion tool comprising:
a receiving portion configured to receive an electrical contact (portion covered in 853 configured to receive spiral unit 815, shown in annotated Fig. 38C below);
a funnel portion configured to guide free ends of conductive wires of a cable into the electrical contact when the contact is located in the receiving portion (funnel-opening housing 812);
and a securing member configured to secure the funnel portion relative to the electrical contact when located in the receiving portion (housing portion 813 is configured to secure the funnel portion relative to the spiral unit when the spiral unit is located in the housing portion),
wherein the receiving portion and the securing member are configured to inter-engage so as to form a cavity therebetween for receiving the contact (the receiving portion and housing portion 813 are configured to inter-engage to form a cavity therebetween, denoted by dotted lines in Fig. 38C, for receiving the contact),
wherein the receiving portion is configured to be inserted inside the securing member (Figs. 38 and 38C).
PNG
media_image3.png
612
960
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated. Melni further discloses that the funnel portion is located within a flange that extends radially outward from the receiving portion (the funnel portion is located within a protruding rim that extends radially outward from the receiving portion shown in annotated Fig 13 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
488
625
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated. Melni further discloses that the funnel portion comprises an inner surface which tapers from a first aperture to a second aperture that is smaller than the first aperture, as a function of direction towards the receiving portion (shown in annotated Fig. 13 below).
PNG
media_image5.png
488
625
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, the rejection of claim 8 is incorporated. Melni further discloses that the inner surface linearly tapers from the first aperture to the second aperture (shown in annotated Fig. 13 above).
Regarding claim 10, the rejection of claim 8 is incorporated. Melni further discloses the receiving portion comprises a through-hole for receiving an electrical contact therein (Fig. 13), wherein the diameter of the second aperture of the funnel portion is smaller than the diameter of the through-hole of the receiving member, for providing a shoulder to abut the electrical contact when received in the through-hole (shown in annotated Fig. 13 below).
PNG
media_image6.png
495
625
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Melni further discloses the funnel portion and the receiving portion are integrally connected (the receiving portion and funnel portion are integrally connected to make up part 121 in Figs. 12 and 13).
Regarding claim 14, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Melni further discloses a kit comprising a tool as recited in claim 1 (connector 100); and said electrical contact (spiral unit 120).
Regarding claim 15, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Melni further discloses a method of inserting conductive wires of a cable into an electrical contact (Column 1, Lines 29-42), the method comprising:
providing the handheld wire insertion tool of claim 1 (see rejection of Claim 1 above);
receiving an electrical contact within the receiving portion (“sleeve(s) that encircle the spiral(s) and that provide means for securing an end of each spiral” in Column 13, Lines 15-22);
securing the funnel portion relative to the electrical contact by engaging the securing member with the receiving portion (Column 14, Lines 38-44); and
inserting the free ends of conductive wires of a cable through the funnel portion and into the electrical contact (free ends of conductive wires of a cable would be inserted through the funnel portion in order to be inserted into the electrical contact; Fig. 13 and Column 15, Lines 10-12).
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melni in view of Gaidosch (US 7416448 B2).
Regarding claim 6, Melni does not teach that the receiving portion is configured to have a radial interference fit with the securing member when inserted inside the securing member. Gaidosch, in the same field of endeavor, related to tools for inserting conductive wires into an electrical contact, teaches of a wire insertion tool comprising:
a receiving portion configured to receive an electrical contact (wire holder 7 configured to receive contact element 13 as shown in Fig. 1a);
a funnel portion configured to guide free ends of conductive wires of a cable into the electrical contact when the contact is located in the receiving portion (wire seats 7.1 in Figs. 4a-b);
and a securing member configured to secure the funnel portion relative to the electrical contact when located in the receiving portion (contact holder 2 configured to secure the funnel portion relative to contact 1 when located in the contact element 13 as shown in Figs. 1a-b),
wherein the receiving portion and the securing member are configured to inter-engage so as to form a cavity therebetween for receiving the contact (contact element 13 and contact holder 2 are configured to inter-engage so as to form a cavity therebetween for receiving the contact 1 as shown in Fig. 1b),
wherein the receiving portion is configured to have a radial interference fit with the securing member when inserted inside the securing member (contact element 13 is configured to have a radial interference fit with the contact holder 2 when inserted inside the contact holder; Col. 7, Lines 52-59 and Fig. 1b).
Given that both Melni and Gaidosch teach tools for inserting conductive wires into an electrical contact, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the welding fixtures that Melni discloses with the radial interference fit that Gaidosch teaches to provide the predictable result of connective the wires to the contact with minimal expense and time (Col. 1, Lines 15-26). (KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)), MPEP 2143 I. B.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melni in view of Holland (US 6536103 B1).
Regarding claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Melni teaches the tool is elongated and has a longitudinal axis (Figs. 12-13), but does not explicitly teach the tool has a length of less than 10 cm along the longitudinal axis, and a radius of less than 10cm in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. However, as Holland discloses that cables used for CATV applications commonly have an outer diameter of less than 3/8 inch (Col. 2, Lines 1-2), have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Melni to have a radius of less than 10 cm in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal axis in order to fit cables for CATV applications.
Additionally, the MPEP 2144.04(IV) provides that “when the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.” (Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984). As the tool as claimed having a length of less than 10 cm along the longitudinal axis does not cause the tool to perform differently than the tool Melni teaches, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the size of the tool of Melni to have a length of less than 10 cm along the longitudinal axis and a radius of less than 10 cm in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. Therefore, the claimed tool is not patentably distinct from the tool of Melni.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melni in view of Carillo, Jr. (US 4,111,593).
Regarding claim 13, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Melni teaches the funnel portion and the receiving portion are formed from annular segments (Figs. 12 and 13), but does not teach the annular segments are separable from each other so that the annular segments may be removed from surrounding a cable. However, Carillo, Jr., in the same field of endeavor related to handheld tools that temporarily latch on to cable wires, teaches a tool with a receiving portion configured to receive an electrical contact (cylindrical section 21 in Fig. 1) and a funnel portion configured to guide the free ends of conductive wires of a cable into the electrical contact when the contact is located in the receiving portion (conical frustum of cutter adapter 20 shown in Fig. 1), wherein the funnel portion and the receiving portion are formed from annular segments and are separable from each other so that the annular segments may be removed from surrounding a cable (Fig. 1 and Col. 2, Lines 1-3).
Given that both Melni and Carillo, Jr. teach tools for inserting conductive wires into an electrical contact, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the annular segments that Melni discloses to be separable as Carillo Jr. teaches, to provide the predictable result of easy placement of the tool over a cable (Col. 3, Lines 30-33). (re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961)), MPEP 2144 V. C.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nye (EP 4411990 A1) is a system for forming electrical connection between wires and a contact. Lindemann (US 2003207610 A1) is a device for connecting contacts with cables. Holmes Jr. (US 3,768,143) is a tool for stripping electrical cables made of separable annular segments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE JOH whose telephone number is (571)272-0410. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8a-5p.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/C.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723