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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species 5, Figs. 32A-32C, with traverse, in paper dated 04/16/26 is acknowledged.
After review, the Examiner have another Specie (missing from the previous Restriction) which is Specie 2.5 that includes Figs. 22-26; therefore:
Claims 3 and 13 (with the limitations of “a central one of the isolated cavities is devoid of a coaxial connector”) are withdrawn from consideration by the Examiner as being drawn to a nonelected Specie 3.
Claims 7-8 (with the limitations of “an orientation feature”) are withdrawn from consideration by the Examiner as being drawn to a nonelected Specie 2.5.
Claims 9-10 (with the limitations of the outer connector body including “a plurality of teeth”) are withdrawn from consideration by the Examiner as being drawn to a nonelected Specie 13.
Claims 3, 7-10 and 13 should be withdrawn.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the coaxial cable attached to the coaxial connector residing the first central cavity is smaller compared to the remaining coaxial cables” in claim 5; must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim 5, “the coaxial cable attached to the coaxial connector residing the first central cavity is smaller compared to the remaining coaxial cables”
Claim Objections
Claim 1, line 12, “recesses” should be –recess--;
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 11-12 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the best mode contemplated by the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s) has not been disclosed. Evidence of concealment of the best mode is based upon.
Regarding claim 1, line 11-12; and claim 11, lines 10-11, “each of the first and third sides includes a recess configured to receive a pin on a mating structure” are not disclosed in the Specification.
Claim 11, line 11, “registration features” are not disclosed in the Specification.
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 1-2, 4, 11-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over G. W. Ziegler, JR. (3,566,334) in view A. H. Roos (1,793,015).
Regarding claim 1, G. W. Ziegler, JR. discloses a ganged connector assembly, comprising:
a shell (13, Fig. 3) comprising a plurality of electrically isolated cavities (12), the shell having a generally square footprint defined by first (a left side), second (a top side), third (a right side) and fourth sides (a bottom side);
a plurality of coaxial connectors (1, Fig. 3), each of the coaxial connectors residing in a respective cavity of the shell;
a plurality of coaxial cables (3), each of the coaxial cables being connected with a respective one of the plurality of coaxial connectors;
wherein the first side is opposite the third side and the second side is opposite the fourth side.
G. W. Ziegler, JR. discloses the claimed invention as described above except for a latch is pivotally attached to the first and third sides; and each of the first and third sides includes a recess configured to receive a pin on a mating structure, once the pin is received in the recess, the latch pivots to engage the pins to secure the assembly to the mating structure.
A. H. Roos, Figs. 1-3 show a latch (20) is pivotally attached to the first and third sides; and each of the first and third sides includes a recess (9) configured to receive a pin (7) on a mating structure (1), wherein once the pin is received in the recess, the latch pivots to engage the pins to secure the assembly to the mating structure. It would have been obvious to modify G. W. Ziegler, JR. to have a latch is pivotally attached to the first and third sides; and each side of the latch includes a recess configured to receive a pin on a mating structure, as taught by A. H. Roos, in order to have more security between both structures in the locked position.
Regarding claim 2, G. W. Ziegler, JR., Fig. 3 shows the cavities (12) are arranged in a cruciform arrangement, with a first (a middle cavity) of the cavities being a central cavity, and a second and a third (at a top line) of the cavities define a first line that passes through the first cavity, and wherein a fourth and a fifth (a bottom line) of the cavities define a second line that passes through the first cavity.
Regarding claim 4, G. W. Ziegler, JR., Fig. 3 shows the plurality of coaxial connectors is five coaxial connectors.
Regarding claim 11, G. W. Ziegler, JR., Fig. 3 shows a ganged connector assembly, comprising:
a shell (13) comprising a plurality of electrically isolated cavities (12), the shell having a generally square footprint defined by first (a left side), second (a top side), third (a right side) and fourth (a bottom) sides;
a plurality of coaxial connectors (1), each of the coaxial connectors residing in a respective cavity of the shell;
a plurality of coaxial cables (3), each of the coaxial cables being connected with a respective one of the plurality of coaxial connectors;
wherein the first side is opposite the third side and the second side is opposite the fourth side; and
registration features (17 and 22) are positioned adjacent the second and fourth sides.
G. W. Ziegler, JR. discloses the claimed invention as described above except for a recess configured to receive a pin from a mating structure.
A. H. Roos, Figs. 1-3 show a recess (9) configured to receive a pin (7) on from a mating structure (1). It would have been obvious to modify G. W. Ziegler, JR. to have a recess configured to receive a pin from a mating structure, as taught by A. H. Roos, in order to have more security between both structures in the locked position.
Regarding claim 12, it is noted that A. H. Roos, Figs. 1 and 2 show a latch (20) pivotally mounted to the first and third sides.
Regarding claim 14, G. W. Ziegler, JR., Fig. 3 shows the plurality of coaxial connectors is five coaxial connectors and the plurality of cavities comprises five cavities in a cruciform arrangement.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over G. W. Ziegler, JR. and A. H. Roos as applied to claims 4 and 14 above, and further in view of Welch (9,711,956)
Regarding claims 5 and 15, G. W. Ziegler, JR. and A. H. Roos disclose the claimed invention as described above except for the central cable is smaller compared to the remaining cables.
Welch, Figs. 5 and 6 show a cable (91, Fig. 5) is smaller compared to remaining cables (90, Figs. 5 and 6). It would have been obvious to modify G. W. Ziegler, JR. to have the central cable is smaller than the remaining cables, as taught by Welch for grounding or control purposes (Welch, column 4, lines 64-66).
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over G. W. Ziegler, JR. and A. H. Roos as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Stowers et al. (5,936,421).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, G. W. Ziegler, JR. and A. H. Roos disclose the claimed invention as described above except for a spring is present in each of the cavities, each of the springs engaging a respective one of the plurality of coaxial connectors and permitting the coaxial connector to float radially and axially relative to the shell.
Stowers et al., Fig. 20 shows a spring (371) is present in each of the cavities (325), each of the springs engaging a respective one of the plurality of coaxial connectors and permitting the coaxial connector to float radially and axially relative to the shell. It would have been obvious to modify G. W. Ziegler, JR. to have a spring is present in each of the cavities, as taught by Stowers et al. for better connection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH TAM T LE whose telephone number is (571)272-2094. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM.
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, Abdul Riyami can be reached at 571-270-3119. 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.
/THANH TAM T LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831 04/30/26
thanh-tam.le@uspto.gov
/ABDULLAH A RIYAMI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights