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 .
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.
Claims 1-11, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itou (US 2020/0144758), in view of Kanemura (US 2019/0199013).
Regarding claim 1: Itou teaches a terminal insert 200 for an unshielded cable 80, the terminal insert 200 being configured to be inserted into an insert receptacle 370 of a connector 300 (see Fig. 3 and 13 and Para. 0079), the terminal insert 200 comprising: an insert receptacle fitting section (at 220; Fig. 8) that is adapted to be fittingly received in at least a part of the insert receptacle (see Figs. 28 and Para. 0091), a terminal receptacle 210 that is adapted to fittingly receive at least parts of a cable terminal 100 (see Fig. 26).
Itou does not explicitly teach a touch protection section at least at a first end configured to protrude forward of the cable terminal to prohibit touching of the cable terminal, wherein the insert receptacle fitting section and the touch protection section are located on one monolithic piece.
Kanemura teaches a touch protection section 29 at least at a first end configured to protrude forward of the cable terminal 11 to prohibit touching of the cable terminal 11 (see Figs. 1-4), wherein an insert receptacle fitting section 32 and the touch protection section 29 are located on one monolithic piece (see Fig. 14).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be able to modify the invention with a touch protection section at least at a first end configured to protrude forward of the cable terminal to prohibit touching of the cable terminal, wherein the insert receptacle fitting section and the touch protection section are located on one monolithic piece as taught by Kanemura into the terminal insert of Itou in order to achieve the advantage of providing protection for the user and terminal when handling the insert and terminal within and still allowing an electrical and mechanical connection to be achieved.
Regarding claim 2: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Itou further teaches wherein the terminal receptacle 210 is substantially complementary to the parts of the cable terminal 100 (see Fig. 26).
Regarding claim 3: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Itou further teaches wherein the terminal receptacle 210 is also located on the monolithic piece (see Figs. 10-11 and Fig. 14 of Kanemura).
Regarding claim 4: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Itou further teaches wherein the terminal insert 200 further comprises at least one terminal insert securing element 228 for securing the terminal insert to the insert receptacle 370 (see Fig. 28 and Para. 0091).
Regarding claim 5: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Itou further teaches wherein the terminal insert 200 further comprises at least one cable terminal securing element (at 212; Fig. 26) for securing the cable terminal 100 to the terminal insert 200 (see Fig. 26 and Para. 0087).
Regarding claim 6: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Itou further teaches wherein the terminal insert 200 further comprises at least one terminal insert securing element 228 for securing the terminal insert 200 to the insert receptacle 370 (Fig. 28) and at least one cable terminal securing element (at 212; Fig. 26) for securing the cable terminal 100 to the terminal insert 200 (Fig. 26), wherein at least one of the at least one terminal insert securing element and the at least one cable terminal securing element is a latching element (see Fig. 26 and Para. 0076).
Regarding claim 7: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Itou further teaches wherein the terminal insert 200 comprises at least one spacing element 232 adapted for spacing the remainder of the terminal insert 200 from an inner wall of the insert receptacle (see Fig. 29).
Regarding claim 8: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 7 and Itou further teaches wherein an outer face of the spacing element 232 is parallel to a terminal insert insertion direction (e.g. along the x-direction; see Fig. 29).
Regarding claim 9: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 7 and Itou further teaches wherein the spacing element 232 extends along a terminal insert insertion direction (see Fig. 29).
Regarding claim 10: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Kanemura further teaches wherein a terminal insert 13 comprises a base body (Fig. 14), the base body comprising a first tube section (at 29; Fig. 14) at which the terminal receptacle 11 is located (see Fig. 4) and a second tube section (at 31; Fig. 14) at which at least a part of an insert receptacle fitting section (at 31; Fig. 12) is located (see Fig. 12 of Kanemura).
Regarding claim 11: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 10 and Kanemura further teaches wherein the base body comprises a third tube section (at 32; Fig. 14) between the first tube section and the second tube section (see Fig. 14 of Kanemura).
Regarding claim 13: Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Itou further teaches wherein the terminal insert 200 comprises a stop face 230 facing in the terminal insert insertion direction (see Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 14: Itou teaches a connector 10 comprising: a terminal insert 200 for an unshielded cable 80, the terminal insert 200 including an insert receptacle fitting section (at 222; Fig. 8), a terminal receptacle 210 that is adapted to fittingly receive at least parts of a cable terminal 100 (see Fig. 26); and an insert receptacle (at 358; Fig. 3) adapted to mate with the terminal insert 200 and with at least one further terminal insert 200 (see Figs. 3 and 28), wherein the insert receptacle fitting section is adapted to be fittingly received in at least a part of the insert receptacle (see Fig. 28).
Itou does not explicitly teach a touch protection section at least at a first end configured to protrude forward of the cable terminal to prohibit touching of the cable terminal, wherein the insert receptacle fitting section and the touch protection section are located on one monolithic piece.
Kanemura teaches a touch protection section 29 at least at a first end configured to protrude forward of the cable terminal 11 to prohibit touching of the cable terminal 11 (see Figs. 1-4), wherein an insert receptacle fitting section 32 and the touch protection section 29 are located on one monolithic piece (see Fig. 14).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be able to modify the invention with a touch protection section at least at a first end configured to protrude forward of the cable terminal to prohibit touching of the cable terminal, wherein the insert receptacle fitting section and the touch protection section are located on one monolithic piece as taught by Kanemura into the terminal insert of Itou in order to achieve the advantage of providing protection for the user and terminal when handling the insert and terminal within and still allowing an electrical and mechanical connection to be achieved.
Regarding claims 15-19: Rejected for substantially the same reasons as claims 2, 4-5, 7, and 10, respectively.
Regarding claim 20: Itou teaches a set (Fig. 1) comprising: a connector 10 comprising an insert receptacle (at 370; Fig. 13), a terminal insert 200 for an unshielded cable 80, and a further terminal insert 200 for a shielded cable (e.g. connector 10 has two terminal inserts 200 and connect with cables 80 and portions of said cable are shielded by an insulator and some portions are not; see Fig. 3 and 32), the terminal insert 200 includes an insert receptacle fitting section (at 222; Fig. 8) that is adapted to be fittingly received in at least a part of the insert receptacle (see Fig. 28 and Para. 0091), a terminal receptacle 210 that is adapted to fittingly receive at least parts of a cable terminal 80 of the unshielded cable (Fig. 1); the further terminal insert 200 (e.g. other insert 200) includes a shielding part (at 220; Fig. 26) that is configured to be connected to a shielding of the shielded cable (see Fig. 26); and the insert receptacle (at 370; Fig. 13) is configured to receive selectively the terminal insert or the further terminal insert (e.g. the insert receptacle receives one or both terminal inserts 200).
Itou does not explicitly teach a touch protection section at least at a first end configured to protrude forward of the cable terminal to prohibit touching of the cable terminal, wherein the insert receptacle fitting section and the touch protection section are located on one monolithic piece.
Kanemura teaches a touch protection section 29 at least at a first end configured to protrude forward of the cable terminal 11 to prohibit touching of the cable terminal 11 (see Figs. 1-4), wherein an insert receptacle fitting section 32 and the touch protection section 29 are located on one monolithic piece (see Fig. 14).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be able to modify the invention with a touch protection section at least at a first end configured to protrude forward of the cable terminal to prohibit touching of the cable terminal, wherein the insert receptacle fitting section and the touch protection section are located on one monolithic piece as taught by Kanemura into the terminal insert of Itou in order to achieve the advantage of providing protection for the user and terminal when handling the insert and terminal within and still allowing an electrical and mechanical connection to be achieved.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 14, and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Itou, in view of Kanemura, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Kanemura teaches a touch protection section 29 at least at a first end configured to protrude forward of the cable terminal 11 to prohibit touching of the cable terminal 11 (see Figs. 1-4), wherein an insert receptacle fitting section 32 and the touch protection section 29 are located on one monolithic piece (see Fig. 14). The modification taught by Kanemura into the terminal insert of Itou is done in order to achieve the advantage of providing protection for the user and terminal when handling the insert and terminal within and still allowing an electrical and mechanical connection to be achieved.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 OSCAR C JIMENEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-0272. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Renee Luebke can be reached at (571) 272-2009. 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.
/OSCAR C JIMENEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights