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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "4" and "6" have both been used to designate the through-hole. The Examiner believes a distinction between the through-hole for the terminals and the through-hole corresponding to the threaded groove. 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. 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.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the Abstract uses phrases that can be applied, such as “Disclosed are” in line 1. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: --ELECTRICAL PLUG WITH SEALING BETWEEN TWO HOUSINGS AND PROCESSING METHOD THEREOF--.
Claim Objections
Claims 3-7 objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 3 line 2, the phrase “positioning grooves” should read --positioning slots--. Claims 4-6 include all the limitations of claim 3 and are objected to for the same reasons. In claim 7 line 3, the word “reserving” should read --. Appropriate correction is required.
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 2-6 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. With regard to claim 2, it is unclear how the through hole 4 through which the terminals extend is concentric with the threaded groove, as it appears that it is a different through-hole that the claim is referencing. For prior art analysis, either the same through-hole as claim 1 or a second through-hole similar to through-hole 6 in the figures will be considered to meet these limitations. Claims 3-6 include all the limitations of claim 2 and are rejected for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mina (5,358,429) in view of Zhou et al. (10,498,070).
With regard to claim 1, Mina teaches, as shown in figures 4-6: “An electrical plug 90, comprising terminals 70 and a housing 92 and 94, wherein the housing comprises: a first housing 94, with a through-hole (interior of 94 in figure 5) for the terminals 70… and a connecting groove 99 for accommodating bolts 72 inside the first housing 94; and a second housing 92, with at least two raised elements 76 for securing the terminals 70 and threaded grooves (portion of the connecting groove that engages the screw 72 in figure 5) that match the connecting groove 99; wherein the terminals 70 are secured on raised elements 76 and then inserted through the through-hole”.
Mina does not teach: “at least one pillar on a back of the first housing, and the second housing also has positioning slots that match the pillars”. However, Mina teaches, as shown in figures 4-6, a pillar (portion of 92 extending outward from the cylindrical portion in figure 5) on the second housing that matches the slots (portion of 94 to the right of 99 in figure 5) of the first housing. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reverse the parts so that there is a pillar on the first housing that matches with a slot on the second housing in order to provide a polarization feature between the two housings. Also, it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955).
Mina also does not teach: “both outer walls of one end of the first housing and the second housing have grooves; after the first and second housings are assembled, a layer of sealant is filled in the grooves”.
In the same field of endeavor before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, Zhou teaches, as shown in figures 1-5: “both outer walls (upper-right wall of 301 in figure 5 and 411) of one end of the first housing 4 and the second housing 301 have grooves 302 and 4111; after the first 4 and second housings 301 are assembled, a layer of sealant 6 is filled in the grooves”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the features of Zhou with the invention of Mina in order to create a better waterproofing between the housings (Zhou, column 5 lines 7-14).
With regard to claim 2, Mina as modified by Zhou teaches: “The electrical plug according to claim 1”, as shown above.
Mina also teaches, as shown in figures 4-6: “wherein the connecting groove 99 is concentric with the through-hole (99 are disposed on either side of the through-hole in figure 5), and the connecting groove 99 has a channel (interior surface of 99 in figure 5) that communicates with the threaded groove; a diameter of the connecting groove 99 is larger than the diameter of the threaded groove, and the diameter of the channel is equal to or greater than the diameter of the threaded groove but smaller than the diameter of the connecting groove 99”.
With regard to claim 7, Mina as modified by Zhou teaches: “A processing method of the electrical plug according to claim 1”, as shown above
Mina also teaches, as shown in figures 4-6: “comprising the following steps: S100, assembling the two housings of the plug 90 with fasteners 72”.
Zhou also teaches, as shown in figures 1-5: “and reserving interconnected grooves 304 on an outer surface of a connection between the two housings; and S200, performing secondary reinforcement on the connection between the two housings by sealing the grooves 304”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the features of Zhou with the invention of Mina in order to create a better waterproofing between the housings (Zhou, column 5 lines 7-14).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection and rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN M KRATT whose telephone number is (571)270-0277. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Abdullah A 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.
/JUSTIN M KRATT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831