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 Objections
Claim 40 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 26. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 26-39, 41, 43 and 48-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 26, line 22 recites, “a first operational state” and line 25 recites, “a second operational state”. However, the original specification does not describe, “a first operational state” and “a second operational state”. Therefore, it is not clear what the first and second operational states are.
Claim 26, lines 12-13 recite, “the ground contacts are top and bottom aligned and electrically connected to each other”. The original specification does not describe the ground contacts being top and bottom aligned. Also, it is not clear what “top and bottom aligned” means. Is a ground contact on top contact interface and a ground contact on bottom contact interface being aligned to each other?
Claims 41, 43 and 48-49 also recite, “a first operational state” and “a second operational state”. Therefore, the same rejection applied to claim 26 also applies to claims 41, 43 and 48-49.
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 40-44 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.
Claims 40- recites the limitation "the ground contact of the rear row" in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 40, 45-47 and 50-51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ju et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0244111 A1).
Regarding claim 40, Ju discloses a bidirectional electrical connection plug 200 adapted for bidirectionally connecting to a connection socket 100, comprising: an insulating base 6; a metal housing 9, covering the insulating base; and a fitting portion 7, disposed on one end of the insulating base 6 and having an outer segment forming a front portion 911 of the metal housing 9, wherein the fitting portion 7 has two contact interface substrates 71, 72 having the same height and facing each other to define an interval between the contact interface substrates 71, 72 as a fitting space 73, wherein each of the two contact interface substrates 71, 72 has a front section, a rear section, and a contact interface, each contact interface comprises a row of contacts 81, 82 formed on a row of terminals, the two rows of contacts 81, 82 of the two contact interfaces are disposed at respective rear sections, and at least one pair of contacts 81, 82 in the two contact interfaces configured to transmit the same type of signal are electrically connected to each other (see Paragraph [0081] describing the use of differential signal terminals), wherein each contact interface substrate 71, 72 further has a row of elastic movement spaces (see Fig. 11 below), which are depressed and spaced apart, and the ground contact (not labeled, see Paragraph [0081]) of the rear row in each contact interface is elastically movable within the corresponding elastic movement space, wherein each of the two contact interface substrates 741, 72 further has an insulating layer having a bottom surface on the row of elastic movement spaces to separate the terminals from the metal housing 9.
[AltContent: textbox (insulating layer)][AltContent: textbox (elastic movement space)]
[AltContent: textbox (insulating layer)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (elastic movement space)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
489
677
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Ju does not disclose the specific sizes of the height of each contact interface substrate, height of the fitting portion, the height of at least a portion of the fitting space, which are defined by a standard MICRO USB electrical connection plug specified by the USB Association.
On the other hand, it is common knowledge that various sizes and shaped USB connector exist such as, USB type-A, USB type-B, MICRO USB, Mini USB, and USB type-C, where all these different types of USB connectors having different shapes and sizes. Also, even the same type connectors can be made in different sizes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrical connection plug taught by Ju such that it would have sizes of the contact interface substrate, the fitting portion, and at least a portion of the fitting space of the electrical connection plug to have sizes as taught by the instant invention because it only deals with changing sizes of the electrical connection plug. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 45, Ju discloses a bidirectional electrical connection plug 200 adapted for bidirectionally connecting to a connection socket 100, comprising: an insulating base 6; a metal housing 9, covering the insulating base 6; and a fitting portion 7, disposed on one end of the insulating base 6 and having an outer segment forming a front portion of the metal housing 9, wherein the fitting portion 7 has two contact interface substrates 71, 72 having the same height and facing each other to define an interval between the contact interface substrates 71, 72 as a fitting space 73, wherein each of the two contact interface substrates 71, 72 has a contact interface, each contact interface comprises a row of contacts 81, 82 formed on a row of terminals, each contact interface comprises a pair of contacts 81, 82 and the contacts 81, 82 configured to transmit the same signal in each pair are electrically connected to each other (see Paragraph [0081] describing the use of differential signal terminals), wherein each contact interface substrate 71, 72 has a row of elastic movement spaces (see Fig. 11 above), which are depressed and spaced apart, and the terminals is elastically movable within the corresponding elastic movement space (see Fig. 11 above), and wherein each of the two contact interface substrates further has an insulating layer (see Fig. 11 above) having a bottom surface on the row of elastic movement spaces to separate the terminals from the metal housing 9.
However, Ju does not disclose the size of the contact interface substrate of the electrical connection plug 200 being compared with the sides of different USB electrical connection plugs such as a standard MICRO USB electrical connection plug and USB Association.
On the other hand, it is common knowledge that various sizes and shaped USB connector exist such as, USB type-A, USB type-B, MICRO USB, Mini USB, and USB type-C, where all these different types of USB connectors having different shapes and sizes. Also, even the same type connectors can be made in different sizes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrical connection plug taught by Ju such that it would have sizes of the contact interface substrate, the fitting portion, and at least a portion of the fitting space of the electrical connection plug to have sizes as taught by the instant invention because it only deals with changing sizes of the electrical connection plug. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claims 46 and 47, Ju discloses that in one embodiment (see Paragraph [0010]) the upper and lower rows of multiple terminals can have a ground terminal/contact and a power terminal/contact and Paragraph [0081] describes the use of differential signal terminals, which is inherently at least a pair of signal contacts consisting of a + contact and a - contact.
Regarding claims 50 and 51, claims 50 and 51 recite the bidirectional electrical connection plug having various numbers of contacts. Ju discloses the electrical connection plug 200 having twelves contacts in upper and lower rows, respectively, which is the number of contacts in each row being greater than nine. Also, since the electrical connection plug 200 of Ju uses at least a pair of differential signal contacts, the electrical connection plug 200 of Ju will have at least a pair of signal contacts consisting of a + contact and a - contact.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrical connection plug taught by Ju such that it would have the number of contacts as taught by the instant invention because an electrical connector can have different numbers of contact depending on its size, shape and function of the electrical connector.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAE MOON HYEON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2093. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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.
/hmh/
/Hae Moon Hyeon/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights