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 .
Response to Amendment
Claim 1 is amended. Claim 6 is cancelled. Claims 10-20 are withdrawn.
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(s) 1-5, 7-9 and 21-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 4,373,463 to Beaudette in view of US 6,712,379 to Graham et al. and US 10,126,334 to Sugar.
Regarding claim 1, Beaudette '463 discloses a cable holder 15 for supporting a cable of a vehicle 12, the cable holder comprising: a body portion 16 defining an engagement surface and a plurality of holes 20; a first hook 18, a second hook 17b, and a third hook 17, wherein the first hook and the third hook extend from a first lateral side of the body portion toward a center of the body portion and the second hook 17b extends from a second lateral side of the body portion toward the center of the body portion (figs 2 and 4), wherein the first hook 18, the second hook 17b, and the third hook 17 each define a curved engagement surface (figs. 4-5), and wherein the first hook, the second hook, and the third hook are aligned along a longitudinal axis of the body portion such that the engagement surfaces of the first hook and the third hook engage a first side of the cable (fig. 2, 4, 5) and the engagement surface of the second hook 17b engages a second side of the cable opposite the first side (fig 5); wherein the first hook, the second hook, and the third hook are configured to receive the cable to removably couple the cable with the cable holder by engaging an exterior surface of the cable at the curved engagement surface (figs 2 and 5); wherein the body portion 16 engages the exterior surface of the cable at the engagement surface (figs 2 and 5).
Beaudette '463 is silent as to the material of the cable device and the hooks of the vehicle cable device.
However, Graham '379 teaches a cable device having a number of hooks 12/14, wherein the first hook, the second hook, and the third hook are manufactured from a flexible material such that the cable breaks away from the cable holder when a first force is exerted on the cable to pull the cable away from the cable holder without transferring a second force to a component of the vehicle that the cable holder is coupled to (col. 4, lines 43-44 - " such as devices manufactured from Kevlar fiberglass, etc.).
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 hooks taught in Beaudette '463 with the flexibility as taught in Graham '379 in order to securely hold and release the cable in an easy and user friendly manner via the flexibility of the hooks.
Beaudette '463 is silent as to a sensor configured to detect a physical presence of the cable at the cable holder to determine whether the cable is coupled with the cable holder, wherein in response to determining that the cable is coupled with the cable holder the sensor is configured to communicate a signal to provide a notification indicating the cable is coupled with the cable holder.
However, Sugar '334 teaches a sensor 34 configured to detect a physical presence of the cable at the cable holder 30 (because magnetic sensors 34 detect the magnetic field generated by the cable only when the cable is physically positioned within cable clamp 30; col. 10, lines 55-56; col. 11, lines 58-67) to determine whether the cable is coupled with the cable holder (because detection of the magnetic field indicates that the cable is positioned within cable clamp 30; col. 11, lines 52-67), wherein in response to determining that the cable is coupled with the cable holder the sensor 34 is configured to communicate a signal (via RFID tag communicating the sensor-generated signals; col. 10, lines 50-56; col. 11, lines 55-62) to provide a notification indicating the cable is coupled with the cable holder (via the RFID tag communicating the sensor- generated signals, because a cable is clamped therein; col. 11, lines 57-62).
Again, 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 cable holder taught in Beaudette '463 with the sensor(s) as taught in Sugar '334 in order to automatically determine whether the cable is coupled with the cable holder and communicate that condition.
Regarding claim 2, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein the plurality of holes 20 are positioned on the body portion 16 such that fasteners of the plurality of holes are accessible when the cable is engaged by the first hook, the second hook, the third hook, and the body portion (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein the cable holder is configured to support a charging cable (col. 2, lines 20-30 - II cables made of multiple components such as plastic coated wire...").
Regarding claim 4, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein the first hook, the second hook, and the third hook, are evenly spaced along a longitudinal length of the body portion (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein the first hook, the second hook, and the third hook are integrally formed with the body portion (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, further comprising: a fourth hook 17a, wherein the fourth hook 17a extends from the second lateral side of the body portion toward a center of the cable holder, and wherein the fourth hook defines a curved engagement surface.
Regarding claim 8, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein the fourth hook 17a is configured to receive the cable 14 to removably couple the cable with the cable holder by engaging the exterior surface of the cable at the curved engagement surface (figs 2 and 5).
Regarding claim 9, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein the fourth hook is manufactured from the flexible material, as modified by Graham '379 (col. 4, lines 43-44 - " such as devices manufactured from Kevlar fiberglass, etc.. - see above motivation).
Regarding claim 21, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein the curved engagement surfaces of the first hook, the second hook, and the third hook are curved about the longitudinal axis of the body portion (figs 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 22, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein the second hook 17b is laterally offset relative to the first hook 18 and the third hook 17 along the longitudinal axis of the body portion.
Regarding claim 23, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein the first hook 18 and the third hook 17 extend from the body portion 16 outward and in a first vertical direction, and the second hook 17b extends from the body portion 16 outward and in a second vertical direction opposite the first vertical direction (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 24, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein the first hook 18, the second hook 17b, and the third hook 17 extend from the body portion 16 such that the curved engagement surfaces of the first hook and the third hook are mirrored about the longitudinal axis of the
body portion relative to the curved engagement surface of the second hook (figs 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 25, Beaudette '463, as modified, discloses, wherein each of the first hook, the
second hook, and the third hook receive the cable 14 such that the cable 14 is received between the
body portion 16 and the engagement surface of each the first hook 18, the second hook 17b, and the
third hook 17.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 520/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Sugar fails to disclose a sensor configured to detect a physical presence of the cable at the cable holder to determine whether the cable is coupled with the cale holder, and further fails to disclose communicating a signal to provide a notification indicating the cable is coupled with the cable holder.
The argument is not persuasive. Sugar teaches magnetic sensors 34 that detect the magnetic field generated by the cable only when the cable is physically positioned within cable clamp 30 and communicates the sensor-generated signals via the RFID tag. Therefore, Sugar reasonably teaches the disputed limitations, as claimed. Accordingly the rejection is maintained.
The examiner suggests that amendment to recite the disclosed embodiment in which the sensor comprises a button configured to be pressed by the cable when the cable is installed on the cable holder appears to overcome the current prior art rejection (applicant’s specification @ fig. 6; para 0024).
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 MONICA E MILLNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7507. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:00pm.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/MONICA E MILLNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights