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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 7, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(a)(2) as being anticipated by DIESSEL et al. [EP 3312940 A1].
Regarding Claim 1, Diessel discloses a push-in insert (2, 4; Figure 2) for a connector (1, 3), the push-in insert (2, 4) comprising: a main body (20 including 230), a push-in contact assembly (211. 411); a retaining plate (21; 41); a protective grounding assembly (23) arranged on a side wall of the push-in insert (2, 4); and a protective conductor (25) being connectable onto the protective grounding assembly (23), wherein the protective grounding assembly (23) comprises a protective grounding plate (22) having a housing part (back wall 226, and side walls 223), a spring (26) having an inverted V shape, and a hollow actuator (270) (see Figures 3-4 and 6), and wherein the spring (26) is partially accommodated in the hollow actuator (270), and when the hollow actuator (270) is not subjected to a pressing force, the hollow actuator is at a retaining position on the spring (26) and the spring (26) is at a static position relative to the housing part (back wall 226, and side walls 223), and when the hollow actuator (270) is subjected to a pressing force in a mating direction, the spring (26) can simultaneously perform a pivoting motion and move vertically in the mating direction.
Regarding Claim 2, Diessel discloses all the limitations of claim 1, Diessel further discloses when the pressing force is released, the spring (26) can simultaneously perform a pivoting motion and move vertically against the mating direction due to elasticity thereof.
Regarding Claim 7, Diessel discloses all the limitations of claim 1, Diessel further discloses the retaining plate (21) is provided, on a narrow side, with an accommodating part (230), for accommodating the housing part (back wall 226, and side walls 223), the spring (26), and the hollow actuator (270) of the protective grounding assembly (23), wherein the accommodating part (230) has a socket (232) for accommodating a head part of the hollow actuator (270) and an insertion hole (231) for inserting the protective conductor (25), and wherein a tool applies a pressing force to the hollow actuator (270) through the socket (232).
Regarding Claim 10, Diessel discloses all the limitations of claim 1, Diessel further discloses a shell (10, Fig 1).
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) 3-5 and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DIESSEL et al. [EP 3312940 A1] in view of Stadler [US 20180062289 A1].
Regarding Claim 3, Diessel discloses all the limitations of claim 2, Diessel further discloses the spring (26) comprises a bent holding leg (261) and a slanted clamping leg (260), wherein one side of the hollow actuator (270) is provided with a slope part (271), and wherein an inner contour of the slope part (271) is constructed to interact with an outer contour of the slanted leg (260). Diessel does not explicitly disclose a straight holding leg.
However, Stadler discloses a spring (40, Fig 3), comprising a straight holding leg (42) and a slanted clamping leg (41).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Diessel as suggested by Stadler to provide a straight holding leg instead of a bent holding leg. Doing so would have been a merely a design variation which would’ve yielded predictable results based on the amount of spring force needed to be generated.
Regarding Claim 4, Diessel and Stadler disclose all the limitations of claim 3, Diessel further discloses the outer contour of the slanted leg (260) comprises a first step part (see annotated Figure 6) and a second step part (see annotated Figure 6), and wherein, when the hollow actuator (270) is not subjected to a pressing force, the slope part (271) is placed on the first step part (see annotated Figure 6) so that the hollow actuator (270) is in the retaining position; and a protruding piece part (see annotated Figure 6) of the second step part (see annotated Figure 6) is engaged on a side wall of the housing part (223) so that the spring (26) is in the static position.
PNG
media_image1.png
623
595
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5, Diessel and Stadler disclose all the limitations of claim 4, Diessel further discloses when the hollow actuator (270) is subjected to a pressing force in the mating direction, movement of the hollow actuator (270) in the mating direction causes the slanted leg (260) to pivot toward the holding leg (261)), whereby the slanted leg is remote from the side wall of the housing part (230), so that the protective conductor (25) can be inserted between the slanted leg (260) and the housing part (back wall 226, and side walls 223); and movement of the hollow actuator (270) in the mating direction further causes the holding leg (261) to move vertically in the mating direction, until stopped by recess (233 of the accommodating part 230) on a side wall of the main body (20,230).
Regarding Claim 8, Diessel and Stadler disclose all the limitations of claim 5, Diessel further discloses the main body (20) is provided, on a narrow side, with an accommodating part (230), used for accommodating a contact element (222, Fig 4) of the protective grounding plate (22), and wherein the accommodating part (230) has the recess (233) for stopping the holding leg (261) of the spring (26).
Regarding Claim 9, Diessel discloses all the limitations of claim 1, Diessel further discloses the push-in contact assembly (211, 411) could comprise a spring force connection. Diessel does not explicitly disclose a contact housing part, an inverted V shaped spring, an actuator, and an electrical contact, wherein the spring is partially accommodated in the actuator, wherein the spring comprises a straight leg and a slanted leg, wherein movement of the straight leg in the mating direction can be stopped by a first stop part of a bottom of the contact housing part, and wherein movement of the straight leg against the mating direction can be stopped by a second stop part of a side face of the contact housing part.
However, Stadler discloses a push-in contact assembly (10, Fig 4) comprises a contact housing part (20), an inverted V shaped spring (40), an actuator (64), and an electrical contact (50), wherein the spring (40) is partially accommodated in the actuator (64), wherein the spring (40) comprises a straight leg (42) and a slanted leg (41), wherein movement of the straight leg (42) in the mating direction can be stopped by a first stop part (27a) the contact housing part (20), and wherein movement of the straight leg (42) against the mating direction can be stopped by a second stop part (27b) of a side face of the contact housing part.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Diessel as suggested by Stadler to provide a contact housing part, an inverted V shaped spring, an actuator, and an electrical contact, wherein the spring is partially accommodated in the actuator, wherein the spring comprises a straight leg and a slanted leg, wherein movement of the straight leg in the mating direction can be stopped by a first stop part of a bottom of the contact housing part, and wherein movement of the straight leg against the mating direction can be stopped by a second stop part of a side face of the contact housing part. Stadler provides specific solution for managing spring travel and preventing over insertion or misalignment within a housing using integral surfaces such as (27a and 27b along with 24, 25a and 25b) which Diessel does not disclose explicitly. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that incorporating the specific contact housing/spring mechanics disclosed by Stadler (which is very similar to the grounding assembly housing/spring mechanics disclosed by Diessel) to the push-in insert of Diessel could serve to improve the mechanical integrity and make it easier to use by limiting the movement of the modules inside during use.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DIESSEL et al. [EP 3312940 A1] in view of Stadler [US 20180062289 A1] in further view of Hanning et al. [US 20120108099 A1].
Regarding Claim 6, Diessel and Stadler disclose all the limitations of claim 5, Diessel further discloses the pressing force is released, the slanted leg (260) of the spring (26) pivots away from the holding leg (261), whereby the protruding piece part (see annotated Figure 6) of the slanted leg is engaged on the protective conductor (25) that has been inserted, so that the protective conductor (25) is locked between the slanted leg (260) and the side wall of the housing part (223), and the holding leg (261) of the spring (26) moves vertically against the mating direction. Diessel and Stadler do not explicitly disclose the holding leg moves vertically against the mating direction until a lug arranged on an outer side of the holding leg is stopped by a bottom cut part on another opposite side wall of the housing part.
However, Hanning discloses a similar housing/spring structure (see Figures 2a-2c) comprising a housing (3), a spring (4) including a slanted leg (14) and a straight leg (19), and when the pressing force is released, the slanted leg (14) of the spring (4) pivots away from the straight leg (19), whereby the protruding piece part (end of the slanted leg (14) of the slanted leg is engaged on the protective conductor (23) that has been inserted, so that the protective conductor (23) is locked between the slanted leg (14) and the side wall of the housing part (3) and the straight leg (19) can move vertically against the mating direction, until a lug (21, Fig 2c) arranged on an outer side of the straight leg (19) is stopped by a bottom cut part (22) on the side wall of the housing part (41).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Diessel and Straddler as suggested by Hanning to provide the holding leg moves vertically against the mating direction until a lug arranged on an outer side of the holding leg is stopped by a bottom cut part on another opposite side wall of the housing part. Doing so would secure the spring to the housing against unwanted movement improving its mechanical stability/integrity as recognized by Hanning.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THASLIMUR RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5831. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-6pm.
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, Tulsidas Patel can be reached at 571 272 2098. 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.
/THASLIMUR RAHMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834 /
Prosecution Insights