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 character “11321” has been used to designate several iterations of the perforated structure, see Figs. 9 - 14.
Similarly, reference characters 12, 14, and 115 have been used been used to designate multiple different structures, as seen in Figures 1, 3, and 6 – 8.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6, and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 4, “an pin” should be a pin. In line 12, “the expected return loss” lacks antecedent basis. Furthermore, “the signal” lacks antecedent basis. In line 13, “the difference” lacks antecedent basis.
In claims 6 and 12, line 4, “the gap” lacks antecedent basis.
In claim 9, line 1, “the material” lacks antecedent basis. In line 3, “the material” lacks antecedent basis. In line 4, “the material” lacks antecedent basis.
In claim 12, line 4, “the gap” lacks antecedent basis.
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 1 – 12 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.
The term “expected return loss” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “expected” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the “return loss” to be achieved is not identifiable due to the subjective relative term “expected”.
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)(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.
Claims 1 – 5 and 10 – 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. No. 2025/0167493 (“Terada”).
Regarding claim 1, Terada discloses an electrical connector, comprising: an electrical connector body (50); and a pin base component (74/61/51), the pin base component comprising a pin base (74), a pin (51), and a first pin base insulator (61), wherein the pin base has an pin base internal space (see Fig. 7), the first pin base insulator has a first pin base insulator through-hole structure (central hole structure 66) and a first pin base insulator perforated structure (openings 68), the pin base is joined to the electrical connector body (see Fig. 7), and the pin and the first pin base insulator are respectively installed to position the first pin base insulator within the pin base internal space (see Fig. 7), allowing the pin to extend outward through the first pin base insulator via the first pin base insulator through-hole structure (see Fig. 7), wherein the first pin base insulator perforated structure provides an air medium (see Figs. 7, and [0047]) to achieve the expected return loss of the signal transmitted by the pin by exploiting the difference in dielectric coefficients between the air medium and the first pin base insulator (see at least [0047] and at least the abstract; return loss is inherent due to impedance mismatching, thus improved impedance matching reduces return loss and achieves a desired return loss of a connector).
Regarding claim 2, Terada discloses herein the first pin base insulator perforated structure comprises a plurality of first pin base insulator perforated sub-structures (left and right openings 68) distributed around the first pin base insulator through-hole structure (see Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 3, Terada discloses wherein the plurality of first pin base insulator perforated sub-structures (68) are individually separated from the first pin base insulator through-hole structure (the central through hole), and the separation distances among the plurality of first pin base insulator perforated sub-structures and the first pin base insulator through-hole structure are substantially equal (openings 68 are symmetrically arranged at sides of the central through hole, see Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 4, Terada discloses wherein the plurality of first pin base insulator perforated sub-structures (68) are separated from each other (see Fig. 7), and the separation distances among the plurality of first pin base insulator perforated sub-structures are substantially equal (see Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 5, Terada discloses wherein the plurality of first pin base insulator perforated sub-structures are polygonal holes (68 is in a rectangular hole).
Regarding claim 10, Terada discloses the electrical connector of claim 1 (See above), configured to be used with a cable (see Fig. 7), further comprising a cable component (80/72), and the cable component comprises a cable base (72), and the cable base comprises a cable base internal space (see Fig. 7), wherein the cable base is joined to the electrical connector body and the cable is installed (see Fig. 7), allowing the cable to enter the electrical connector body from the cable base internal space and electrically connect to the pin to provide the signals (See Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 11, Terada discloses wherein the cable base further comprises a cable base clamping structure (73), the cable base clamping structure clamps and positions the cable to achieve the installation of the cable (see Fig. 7).
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terada in view of U.S. Pat. No. 5,607,325 (“Toma”).
Regarding claim 6, Terada does not disclose a pin base component waterproof gasket located between the pin base and the electrical connector body to prevent water from penetrating into the pin base internal space via the gap between the pin base and the electrical connector body.
However, Toma teaches a connector with an electrical connector body (16) and a pin base component (18/20/14), where there is a pin base (18) and a pin base component waterproof gasket (22) located between the pin base and the electrical connector body (see Fig. 2) to prevent water from penetrating into a pin base internal space via the gap between the pin base and the electrical connector body (see Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to provide a gasket member as taught by Toma, because this helps ensure that moisture does not enter the connector and damage or otherwise interfere with the pin connective structure.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terada in view of U.S. Pat. No. 5,354,217 (“Gabel”).
Regarding claim 12, Terada does not disclose a cable component waterproof gasket located between the cable base and the electrical connector body to prevent water from penetrating into the cable base internal space via the gap between the cable base and the electrical connector body.
However, Gabel teaches a connector with an electrical connector body (21/20) and a pin base component (15/20/41), where there is a cable base (30) and a cable base component waterproof gasket (53) located between the cable base and the electrical connector body (see Fig. 2) to prevent water from penetrating into a pin base internal space via the gap between the pin base and the electrical connector body (see Fig. 2 and col. 3, lns. 28 – 31).
It would have been obvious to provide a gasket member as taught by Gabel, because this helps ensure that moisture does not enter the connector and damage or otherwise interfere with the connection between the cable and the connector.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, and if all applicable 112(b) rejections and claim objections are remedied.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 7, the prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed connector, including wherein the pin base component further comprises a second pin base insulator, the second pin base insulator having a second pin base insulator through-hole structure, wherein the pin base is capable of accommodating the second pin base insulator, positioning the second pin base insulator within the pin base internal space, and allowing the pin to extend outward through the second pin base insulator via the second pin base insulator through-hole structure, wherein there exists a difference in dielectric coefficients between the first pin base insulator and the second pin base insulator, thereby enabling the pin to transmit signals with the expected return loss, along with the remaining elements of the claim.
Terada discloses the pin base and air channels which are positioned to enable an expected return loss, but does not disclose a second pin base insulator positioned and having the difference in dielectric coefficients as required by the claims. Nishimura discloses a connector with air space openings 78, but does not disclose first and second insulators positioned and having the features as required by the claims. Similarly, Miyawakai discloses an open air space 22, but does not disclose first and second insulators positioned and having the features as required by the claims. Kawachi is a connector which utilizes air and a pair of dielectric members to control impedance, but the dielectrics are identical.
The prior art, when taken alone, or in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL D BAILLARGEON whose telephone number is (571)272-0676. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m.
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, Renee Luebke can be reached at (571) 272-2009.
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.
/PAUL D BAILLARGEON/Examiner, Art Unit 2831
/renee s luebke/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights