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 were received on 12/8/25. These drawings are acceptable.
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 and 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshiya (JP2011044303A).
With regard to claim 1, Toshiya teaches, as shown in figures 1-10 and taught on page 2 lines 8-11: “A connector assembly 10, 30, and 50 comprising: a connector 30; and a connector cover 10 fitted around the connector to cover the connector, wherein the connector includes: a connector body 31 extending in an axial direction (top-to-bottom in figure 3) between a base end portion and a tip end portion, a lever 40 disposed radially outward of the connector body 31 and extending in the axial direction; an elastically deformable coupling portion 41 integrally coupling an intermediate portion of the lever 40 to the connector body 31, the coupling portion 41 serving as a rotation center of the lever 40; an engaging portion 42 provided at a tip end portion of the lever 40 and configured to be engaged with a mating connector 50; and an operation surface 43 provided on a base end portion of the lever 40 and directed radially outward of the connector body 31 in order to rotate the lever 40, the connector cover 10 includes an abutment portion (portion of 10 abutted against 43 in figure 4) abutted against the operation surface 43… the abutment portion is made of an elastic material (page 2 lines 8-11 teach the abutment surface being an elastic material), and the abutment portion is pushed by the operation surface 43 to be elastically recessed (figures 5 and 6 show the operation portion pushing against the elastic abutment portion), and abutment portion is in surface contact with the operation surface”.
Toshiya does not teach: “the operation surface is a flat surface”. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention change the shape of the operation surface to a flat surface in order to increase the area of the operation surface to make it easier to operate. Also, a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
With regard to claim 3, Toshiya teaches: “The connector assembly according to claim 1”, as shown above.
Toshiya also teaches, as shown in figures 1-10 and taught on page 3 line 16 of the translation: “wherein a whole of the connector cover 10 is made of an elastic material”.
With regard to claim 4, Toshiya teaches: “The connector assembly according to claim 1”, as shown above.
Toshiya also teaches, as shown in figures 1-10: “wherein a radial gap 32 is formed between the base end portion of the lever 40 and the connector body 31, and no portion of the connector cover 10 exists in the gap 32”.
With regard to claim 5, Toshiya teaches: “The connector assembly according to claim 1”, as shown above.
Toshiya also teaches, as shown in figures 1-10: “wherein a radial gap 32 is formed between the base end portion of the lever 40 and the base end portion of the connector body 31, and the base end portion of the lever 40 is radially rotatable around the coupling portion 41”.
With regard to claim 6, Toshiya teaches: “The connector assembly according to claim 1”, as shown above.
Toshiya also teaches, as shown in figures 1-10: “wherein the lever 40 is configured such that, when the operation surface 43 receives a pressing force via the connector cover 10, the 31 around the coupling portion 41”.
With regard to claim 7, Toshiya teaches: “The connector assembly according to claim 1”, as shown above.
Toshiya also teaches, as shown in figures 1-10: “wherein the abutment portion of the connector cover 10 is abutted against the operation surface 43 of the lever 40, and prevents the base end portion of the lever 40 from radially outward rotating around the coupling portion 41”.
With regard to claim 8, Toshiya teaches: “The connector assembly according to claim 1”, as shown above.
Toshiya also teaches, as shown in figures 1-10: “wherein a radial gap S is formed between the tip end portion of the lever 40 and the connector cover 10”.
With regard to claim 9, Toshiya teaches: “The connector assembly according to claim 1”, as shown above.
Toshiya also teaches, as shown in figures 1-10 and taught on page 1 lines 23-25 of the translation: “wherein the connector 30 is configured to be connected to a mating connector 50 of a component attached to an engine”.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/8/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With regard to claim 1, the Applicant argues that the cited reference Toshiya does not teach the limitations “the operation surface is a flat surface, the abutment portion is made of an elastic material, and the abutment portion is pushed by the operation surface to be elastically recessed, and abutment portion is in surface contact with the operation surface”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees, since Toshiya teaches the abutment portion being made of an elastic material and the operation surface pressed against the elastic material of the abutment portion, which would elastically recess the operation surface in the abutment portion. Further, changing the shape of the operation surface is an obvious modification of the shape of the operation surface.
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 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