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 § 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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anaticipated by Verhoeven (4,715,824).
Regarding claim 14, Verhoeven discloses a connector, comprising:
a housing (1, Fig. 1) defining:
a plurality of receiving channels (14, Fig. 5), each receiving channel defined by two first side walls (not labeled) extending upwardly from a bottom wall (2, Fig. 5) of the housing and two second side walls (9) extending downwardly from a top wall (3, Fig. 3) of the housing;
a limiter (FIUGRE A below) connected between one of the first side walls and a corresponding one of the second side walls; and
a stopper (18, fig. 4) formed in each of the receiving channels; and
a plurality of terminals (10, Fig. 4) arranged in respective ones of the plurality of receiving channels, each terminal having a first end (15, Fig. 3) adapted to be connected to a wire (11), and a second end (16, Fig. 4) adapted to be connected to a mating terminal (22, Fig. 6) of a printed circuit board (20), each stopper opposing the second end of a respective one of plurality of terminals and adapted to prevent the second end of the terminal from disengaging from the mating terminal when the wire is subjected to an external force, wherein the limiter is adapted to abut the printed circuit board for limiting a distance which the printed circuit board is inserted into the housing.
PNG
media_image1.png
237
263
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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, 4, 6-11, 21-22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aldridge et al. (4,217,024) in view of Kinkaid (3,656,093).
Regarding claims 1 and 21, Aldridge et al. disclose a connector comprising:
a housing (7, Fig. 1) defining:
a receiving channel (9, Fig. 1);
a first stopper (55A, Fig. 9) defined on a bottom wall of the receiving channel; and
a second stopper (55B, Fig. 9) defined on a top wall of the receiving channel; and
a terminal (11 and 23, Fig. 9) arranged in the receiving channel (Fig. 9) and having a first end (23, Fig. 9), and a second end including a first elastic arm (29, Fig. 9) and a second elastic arm (another 29) extending obliquely towards each other and adapted to be connected to a mating terminal (3, fig. 9), the first stopper aligned with the first elastic arm and the second stopper aligned with the second elastic arm such that a free end (35, Fig. 9) of the first elastic arm and a free end (another 35) of the second elastic arm abut against a respective one of the first stopper and the second stopper preventing the second end of the terminal from disengaging from the mating terminal.
Aldridge et al. disclose the claimed invention as described above except for the terminal having the first end connected to a wire.
Kinkaid, Fig. 1 shows a terminal (EC) having a first end (6) connected to a wire (not labeled). It would have been obvious to modify Aldridge et al. to have the terminal having the first end connected to a wire, as taught by Kinkaid for better connection.
Regarding claim 4, it is noted that Kinkaid, Fig. 1 shows the first end of the terminal defines a cylindrical shape accommodating the wire.
Regarding claim 6, Aldridge et al. disclose the claimed invention as described above except for the receiving channel further includes: two first side walls arranged on opposite sides of the first stopper on the bottom wall; and two second side walls arranged on opposite sides of the second stopper on the top wall.
Kinkaid, Fig. 1 shows the receiving channel (2) includes: two first side walls (both side walls of 3) arranged on opposite sides of a first stopper (3) on a bottom wall; and two second side walls (both side walls of another 3) arranged on opposite sides of a second stopper (another 3) on a top wall. It would have been obvious to modify Aldridge et al. to have the receiving channel further includes: two first side walls arranged on opposite sides of the first stopper on the bottom wall; and two second side walls arranged on opposite sides of the second stopper on the top wall, as taught by Kinkaid for better engaging.
Regarding claim 7, it is noted that Kinkaid, Fig. 1 shows each of the first side walls and corresponding ones of the second side walls are aligned with and spaced apart from each other.
Regarding claim 8, it is noted that Kinkaid, Fig. 1 shows each of the first side walls protrudes from the bottom wall towards a corresponding one of the second side walls beyond the first stopper, and each of the second side walls protrudes from the top wall towards a corresponding one of the first side walls beyond the second stopper.
Regarding claim 9, it is noted that Kinkaid discloses the mating terminal is defined on a printed circuit board inserted between the first side walls and the second side walls (Kinkaid’s abstract).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Aldridge et al. and Kinkaid disclose the free ends of each of the first and second elastic arms comprises an arc-shaped free end portion abutting against the mating terminal after the printed circuit board is inserted between the first side walls and the second side walls.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Aldridge et al. and Kinkaid disclose each of the first and second stoppers is formed as a strip extending longitudinally along the receiving channel, a tip of each of the free ends abuts against the strip to maintain contact between the free ends and the mating terminal when the wire is subjected to the external force.
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Aldridge et al. and Kinkaid disclose each of the first and second elastic arms comprises an arc-shaped portion abutting against the mating terminal after the printed circuit board is inserted between the first side walls and the second side walls, the tip defining a free end of the arc-shaped portion.
Regarding claim 24, Aldridge et al. disclose each of the first elastic arms and the second elastic arms has width (pointed at 29, Fig. 3) extending in a direction normal to the protruding directions of the first and second stoppers, and a thickness in a direction parallel to the protruding directions of the first and second stoppers, wherein the width is greater than the thickness.
Claims 12-13 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aldridge et al. in view of Kinkaid applied to claims 7 and 21 above, and further in view of Verhoeven (4,715,824).
Regarding claims 12 and 23, it is noted that Kinkaid, Figs. 1 and 2 show each receiving channel further includes: two first side walls arranged on opposite sides of the first stopper (3, Fig. 1) on the bottom wall; and two second side walls arranged on opposite sides of the second stopper (another 3, Fig. 1) on the top wall, wherein: each of the first side walls and corresponding ones of the second side walls are aligned with and spaced apart from each other. Aldridge et al. and Kinkaid disclose the claimed invention as described above except for the receiving channel further defines a limiter connected between one of the first side walls and corresponding one of the second side walls, the limiter adapted to contact the printed circuit board for limiting a distance which the printed circuit board is inserted into the housing.
Verhoeven discloses a limiter (FIGURE A above) connected between one of the first side walls and corresponding one of the second side walls, the limiter adapted to contact the printed circuit board for limiting a distance which the printed circuit board (20, Fig. 6) is inserted into the housing (1). It would have been obvious to modify Aldridge et al. and Kinkaid to have the limiter, as taught by Verhoeven for better connection.
Regarding claim 13, it is noted that Verhoeven, FIGURE A above shows corresponding the limiter and the corresponding first and second side walls define a C-shape.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verhoeven in view of Kinkaid (3,656,093).
Regarding claim 16, Verhoeven discloses the claimed invention as described above except for the stopper includes a first stopper defined on a bottom wall of the receiving channel; a second stopper defined on a top wall of the receiving channel; and the second end of the terminal includes first and second elastic arms extending obliquely towards each other, the first stopper is aligned with the first elastic arm, and the second stopper is aligned with the second elastic arm.
Kinkaid, Figs. 1 and 2 show a first stopper (3, Fig. 1) defined on a bottom wall of the receiving channel; a second stopper (another 3, Fig. 1) defined on a top wall of the receiving channel; and the second end of the terminal includes first and second elastic arms (11 and 12) extending obliquely towards each other, the first stopper is aligned with the first elastic arm, and the second stopper is aligned with the second elastic arm. It would have been obvious to modify Verhoeven to have a first stopper defined on a bottom wall of the receiving channel; a second stopper defined on a top wall of the receiving channel; and the second end of the terminal includes first and second elastic arms extending obliquely towards each other, the first stopper is aligned with the first elastic arm, and the second stopper is aligned with the second elastic arm, as taught by Kinkaid for easier engaging.
Regarding claim 17, it is noted that Kinkaid, Fig. 1 shows each of the receiving channels further includes: the two first side walls are arranged on opposite sides of the first stopper on the bottom wall; and the two second side walls are arranged on opposite sides of the second stopper on the top wall.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Verhoeven and Kinkaid disclose each of the first side walls and corresponding ones of the second side walls are aligned with and spaced apart from each other, the corresponding first side walls and the second side walls defining an opening adapted to receive the printed circuit board defining the mating terminal.
Regarding claim 19, it is noted that Kinkaid, Fig. 1 shows each of the first side walls protrudes from the bottom wall towards a corresponding one of the second side walls beyond the first stopper, and each of the second side walls protrudes from the top wall towards a corresponding one of the first side walls beyond the second stopper.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Verhoeven and Kinkaid disclose each of the first and second stoppers is formed as a strip extending longitudinally along the receiving channel, a tip of each of the first and second elastic arms of the terminal abuts against the strip to maintain the elastic arms in contact with the mating terminal when the wire is subjected to the external force.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4, 6-14 and 16-24 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.
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 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 06/15/26
thanh-tam.le@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights