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 Objections
Applicant is advised that should claims 1-10 be found allowable, claims 11-20 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Here, claim 11 is distinguished from claim 1 by additional recitation of “a conductive housing” and “two ends of the first grounding elastic along the first direction arm being connected to the first ground sheet….” The recitation of “a housing” in claim 1 includes conductive housings, thus the recitation of “a conductive housing” in claim 11 fails to present any patentable distinction relative to “a housing” in claim 1. With respect to the “two ends of the first grounding elastic…,” Examiner notes that the limitation appears to be wholly inherent to the previously recited elements of claim 11.
As filed, the claim recites that “two ends” of the “first grounding elastic [arm] along the first direction” are “connected to the first ground sheet.” However, the first grounding elastic arm is a component of the first ground sheet1. Thus, every portion of the first grounding elastic arm must inherently be connected to the first ground sheet, directly or indirectly, otherwise it would not be an element of the first ground sheet.
In view of the above, Examiner finds that claims 1 and 11 are functionally identical in scope.
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 11-20 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.
Regarding claim 11, Applicant recites “two ends of the first grounding elastic along the first direction arm being connected to the first ground sheet….” As a first matter, it appears Applicant has made a typographical error when drafting the claim. As best understood by Examiner, the limitation should instead reference “two ends of the first grounding elastic arm along the first direction being connected to the ground sheet….” Appropriate amendment is required.
As a second matter, the limitation is unclear because the limitation is either inherent or incomprehensible. If Applicant has intended for the “two ends” to be two opposing ends that are connected to the same element, then it is unclear which element is intended to be connected. As best understood by Examiner, the first grounding elastic arm is a component of the first ground sheet, meaning that every portion of the first ground arm is connected to the first ground sheet, rendering the limitation irrelevant as it recites an inherent configuration of the first grounding elastic arm.
As claim 11 would be functionally identical in scope to claim 1, it becomes unclear whether Applicant has misevaluated the scope of the claim limitations as filed or made a typographical error meaning to reference some element other than “the first ground sheet.” Claims 12-20 do not provide any further clarification as these claims simply repeat the limitations found in claims 2-10. As a result, claims 11-20 are indefinite. Appropriate clarification is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by CN 116544691 (“Huang”), which corresponds to U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0347955.
The applied reference has a common inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
References to text are made to the partial translation of the CN document provided by Applicant with the IDS received on 06/05/2024.
Regarding claim 1, Huang discloses:
An electrical connector (FIG 1), comprising:
a housing (FIG 2:1), the housing defining a receiving slot (110) configured to at least partially receive a mating module (200) along a first direction (M);
a first terminal module (FIG 11), the first terminal module comprising two first conductive terminals (32) which are a first signal terminal and a second signal terminal (para. [0073]), respectively;
each first conductive terminal comprising a first contact arm (the terminals 32 are contact arms, thus element 32 depicts both “first conductive terminals” and “first contact arms”);
the first contact arm comprising a first contact portion (FIG 13:321) protruding into the receiving slot (see, e.g., FIG 18); and
a first ground sheet (FIG 6:2);
one end of the first ground sheet being fixed relative to the housing (the side corresponding to element 20 is fixed relative to the housing; see para. [0069]);
the first ground sheet comprising a first grounding elastic arm (FIG 7:22) located on one side of the first contact arm of the first signal terminal and the first contact arm of the second signal terminal (as may be seen by FIG 6, a right-most grounding arm is located on “one side” of both the first and second signal terminals) along a second direction (W);
the first direction being perpendicular to the second direction (M and W are perpendicular, as shown by FIG 5);
wherein the first grounding elastic arm at least partially protrudes into the receiving slot (as may be seen in FIG 18);
one end of the first grounding elastic arm is fixed (FIG 7; the portion of arm 22 which is affixed to second mounting plate 25 may be reasonably interpreted as being “fixed”), and the other end of the first grounding elastic arm is movable along the first direction after the mating module is inserted into the receiving slot (see FIG 18; when mating module 200 is inserted as shown, a grounding arm 331 of the first terminal module will contact ground arm 22, causing it to deflect along a direction having motion in both the first direction and a vertical direction that is perpendicular to the first direction).
Regarding claim 2, Huang discloses the limitations as set forth in claim 1 and further discloses the first ground sheet (2) comprising a first mounting plate (FIG 7:24), a second mounting plate (portion of element 25 below the line in annotated FIG 6, below), a first connecting plate (20) connecting one side of the first mounting plate and one side of the second mounting plate (as shown by FIG 7), and a first extension plate (unlabeled, right-most portion of arm 22 which, as shown by FIG 6, connects the plurality of grounding arms 22) extending from another side of the second mounting plate (the first extension plate of Huang extends rightward from a right side of the second mounting plate 25); the first grounding elastic arm is provided on the second mounting plate (as depicted in FIG 7).
PNG
media_image1.png
338
538
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Huang discloses the limitations as set forth in claim 2 and further discloses the housing comprising a first protruding portion (FIG 6:14) located on one side (i.e., the top side, as FIG 6 is a vertically flipped depiction of FIG 5) of the receiving slot (110); the first protruding portion comprises a second lower surface exposed to the receiving slot (the portion of element 14 in FIG 6 which is within or faces the insertion slot), a second upper surface opposite to the second lower surface (the opposing face of element 14 in FIG 6 which is not depicted in FIG 6), and a first recess (as may be seen in FIGS 5 and 6, there is an open space behind element 14 which may be reasonably construed as “a first recess”) exposed to the second lower surface (as may be seen from FIG 18, the recess behind element 14 is “exposed to the second lower surface, i.e., the interior surface of element 14, in the sense that it is directly adjacent to the second lower surface), the first extension plate being received in the first recess (as shown by FIG 18, the extension plate is clearly within the space considered to be “the first recess”).
Regarding claim 5, Huang discloses the limitations as set forth in claim 4 and further discloses the first extension plate being a movable end (extension plate is located on the end of the arm which deflects when the mating member is inserted); and the first extension plate is movable along the first direction (see FIG 18; when mating module 200 is inserted as shown, a grounding arm 331 of the first terminal module will contact ground arm 22, causing it to deflect along a direction having motion in both the first direction and a vertical direction that is perpendicular to the first direction).
Regarding claim 8, Huang discloses the limitations as set forth in claim 2 and further discloses the first grounding elastic arm comprising a first intermediate portion (the bend between elements 25 and 220 of FIG 7), a first elastic arm portion connecting one end of the first intermediate portion and the first connecting plate (portion of element 25 extending between the bend and the line in annotated FIG 7, below), and a second elastic arm portion connecting another end of the first intermediate portion and the first extension plate (element 220, extending from the bend to the unlabeled extension plate at the right end of annotated FIG 7, below); the first elastic arm portion comprises a first contact elastic arm (the first elastic arm portion is a portion of the first grounding elastic arm, and the first grounding elastic arm is a contact arm; thus, the first elastic arm portion may be reasonably interpreted as being “a first contact elastic arm”) extending toward the first intermediate portion (the first elastic arm portion/the first contact elastic arm extends from the first connecting plate toward the first intermediate portion); the second elastic arm portion comprises a second contact elastic arm (the second elastic arm portion is a portion of the first grounding elastic arm, and the grounding elastic arm is a contact arm; thus, the second elastic arm portion may be reasonably interpreted as being “a second contact elastic arm”) extending toward the first intermediate portion (the second elastic arm portion/the second contact elastic arm extends from the first extension plate toward the intermediate portion); the first intermediate portion, the first contact elastic arm, and the second contact elastic arm are all configured to be in electrical contact with the mating module (as shown by FIG 18, grounding elastic arm 22 is in electrical contact with grounding arm 331 of the first terminal module; as the first intermediate portion and the contact elastic arms are all electrically interconnected as subelements of grounding elastic arm 22, they are inherently in electrical contact with the mating module).
PNG
media_image2.png
374
549
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Applicant merely recites an alternative phrasing of claim 1 having the same scope as claim 1 (as discussed in the Double Patenting section above). As the scope of claim 11 is functionally identical, the rejection of claim 1 applies, mutatis mutandis, to the subject matter of claim 11.
Regarding claims 12, 14, 15, and 18, Applicant merely recites the same subject matter found in claims 2, 4, 5, and 8, respectively. These claims are functionally identical in scope and, thus, the rejections of claims 2, 4, 5, and 8 apply, mutatis mutandis, to the respective subject matters of claims 12, 14, 15, and 18.
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 3, 6, 7, 13, 16, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Huang as applied to claims 2, 4, 12, and 14, above, and further in view of common knowledge within the art.
The applied reference (Huang) has a common inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Regarding claims 3, Huang discloses the limitations as set forth in claim 2, and further discloses the housing comprising a first protruding portion (FIG 6:14) located on one side (i.e., the top side, as FIG 6 is a vertically flipped depiction of FIG 5) of the receiving slot (110); the first protruding portion comprises a second lower surface exposed to the receiving slot (the portion of element 14 in FIG 6 which is within or faces the insertion slot), a second upper surface opposite to the second lower surface (the opposing face of element 14 in FIG 6 which is not depicted in FIG 6).
Huang does not disclose “a first positioning post protruding beyond the second upper surface” or “the first mounting plate defin[ing] a first mounting positioning hole to fixed the first positioning post” as recited by claim 3.
This difference between the prior art and the instant claims may be characterized as provision of a physical retention means that relies on interlocking elements rather than simply frictional resistance. The use of interlocking elements is well-known in the art for the purposes of providing a more secure connection of elements that prevents separation of the relevant components by merely pulling on the components.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (prior to the effective filing date) to modify Huang to further include a plurality of positioning protrusions on the second upper surface along with a corresponding number of positioning apertures in the first mounting plate for the purposes of more securely fixing the grounding element 2 to the housing 1, preventing accidental removal of the grounding element when the mating module is removed from the receiving slot.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Huang discloses the limitations as set forth in claim 4 but does not disclose the first protruding portion comprising a first mounting block protruding into the first recess, the first extension plate defining a first mounting hole to receive the first mounting block, wherein a dimension of the first mounting hole along the first direction is larger than a dimension of the first mounting block along the first direction.
This difference between the prior art and the instant claims may be characterized as provision of a physical retention means that relies on interlocking elements rather than simply frictional resistance. The use of interlocking elements is well-known in the art for the purposes of providing a more secure connection of elements that prevents separation of the relevant components by merely pulling on the components.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (prior to the effective filing date) to modify Huang to further include a plurality of first mounting blocks along with a corresponding number of first mounting holes in the first extension plate for the purposes of more securely fixing the grounding element 2 to the housing 1, preventing accidental removal of the grounding element when the mating module is removed from the receiving slot. Inherent to this modification is the dimensioning of the first mounting holes to be larger than the first mounting blocks along the first direction; if they were not dimensioned such, the blocks would not fit into the mounting holes and the grounding plate would not be securely fixed in the manner intended.
Regarding claims 13, 16, and 17, Applicant merely recites the same subject matter recited by claims 3, 6, and 7, respectively. As such, the rejections of claims 3, 6, and 7 apply, mutatis mutandis, to the subject matter of claims 13, 16, and 17.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 10, 19, and 20 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: the prior art of record, taken alone or in reasonable combination with others, fails to disclose the subject matter of cited claims. More specifically, Huang does not contemplate a plurality of relief grooves formed within the first elastic arm to accommodate a plurality of contact elastic arms. This subject matter is reflected in, e.g., FIG 31 of the instant application as filed. As can be seen, the “contact arms” contemplated by the instant claims are additional arms placed within recesses of the first elastic arm. There is no clear motivation to modify Huang to arrive at the limitations of claim 9 because Huang simply does not contemplate such a configuration. Claim 19 recites the same subject matter and would be allowable for the same reasons. Claims 10 and 20 depend from claims 9 and 19, respectively, and would also be allowable for the same reasons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS K QUIGLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4050. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 AM - 4:30 PM 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, TULSIDAS PATEL can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/THOMAS K QUIGLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
1 “[T]he first ground sheet comprising a first grounding elastic arm…” (emphasis by Examiner).