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 § 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.
Claim 6 is 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.
Claim 6 line 1 recites: “wherein the bottom portion has no hole”. It is ambiguous that Applicant just simply recite the limitation above without any other structure or detail of this “no hole”. What is this hole or no hole related to other structure or does it have any other relationship or any specific reason that the bottom portion has no hole. It seems that the “no hole” limitation has nothing to do with the claim invention or anything to do with the present invention or at least related to the independent claim 2 invention. Further clarification is required.
Therefore, claim 6 is rejected.
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.
Claim(s) 2-4 as best understood and is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamazaki et al. (JP2011065802).
As per claim 2: Yamazaki et al. discloses a connector (as shown in fig. 1) which is mateable with a mating connector positioned upward of the connector in an up-down direction (as shown in fig. 4), wherein: the connector comprises a housing 1 and a contact 10; the housing 1 has a holding portion 2, a bottom portion 3 and a movement suppression portion 8; the housing 1 is formed with a receiving portion 7 which is situated upward of the bottom portion 3 and opens upward and an allowing portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein there is a space between the bent portion of the terminal and the wall 4) communicating with the receiving portion 7 in a lateral direction perpendicular to the up-down direction (as shown in fig. 1);
the movement suppression portion 8 extends toward the receiving portion 7 over the allowing portion (as shown in fig. 1);
the contact 10 has a held portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein the held portion is located between 2 elements 10b and 10f), a lower end portion 10a extending from the held portion, a bent portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein the lower portion 10a are having 2 bent portions in 2 sides to create the receiving portion) provided at one end of the lower end portion 10a, a supporting portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein the support portion is in between the bent portion and the contact portion 10e) extending from the bent portion (as shown in fig. 1), a contact point 10e supported by the supporting portion and a tip portion 10d extending from the contact point 10e; the held portion is held by the holding portion 2 (as shown in fig. 1); the lower end portion 10a and the bent portion are situated in the receiving portion 7; and
the tip portion 10d is situated in the allowing portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein there is a space between the bent portion of the terminal and the wall 4) at least in part and hidden by the movement suppression portion 8 at least in part when viewed along the up-down direction (as shown in fig. 1).
As per claims 3-4: Yamazaki et al. discloses the connector (as shown in fig. 1), wherein the supporting portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein the support portion is in between the bent portion and the contact portion 10e) is situated in the receiving portion 7 but not situated in the allowing portion (as shown in fig. 1); and wherein the supporting portion has a first linear portion extending obliquely upward from the bent portion toward the movement suppression portion 8 and a second linear portion extending obliquely upward from the first linear portion but away from the movement suppression portion 8 in the lateral direction (see attached fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
247
471
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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) 1 as best understood and is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki et al. (JP2011065802).
As per claim 1: Yamazaki et al. discloses a method for manufacturing a connector (as shown in fig. 1) which is mateable with a mating connector positioned upward of the connector in an up-down direction (as shown in fig. 4), wherein: the method comprises preparing a housing 1 and a contact intermediate product 10; the housing 1 has a holding portion 2, a bottom portion 3 and a movement suppression portion 8; the housing 1 is formed with a receiving portion 7 which is situated upward of the bottom portion 3 and opens upward and an allowing portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein there is a space between the bent portion of the terminal and the wall 4) communicating with the receiving portion 7 in a lateral direction perpendicular to the up-down direction (as shown in fig. 1); the movement suppression portion 8 extends toward the receiving portion 7 over the allowing portion (as shown in fig. 1); the contact intermediate product 10 has a held portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein the held portion is located between 2 elements 10b and 10f), a lower end portion 10a extending from the held portion, a bent portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein the lower portion 10a are having 2 bent portions in 2 sides to create the receiving portion) provided at one end of the lower end portion 10a, a supporting portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein the support portion is in between the bent portion and the contact portion 10e) extending from the bent portion (as shown in fig. 1), a contact point 10e supported by the supporting portion and a tip portion 10d extending from the contact point 10e; the contact point 10e faces a facing portion 10f provided on the held portion (not label, see fig. 1, wherein the held portion is located between 2 elements 10b and 10f) in the lateral direction; the method further comprises making the holding portion 2 of the housing 1 hold the held portion of the contact intermediate 10 product to attach the contact intermediate product 10 to the housing 1 (as shown in fig. 1); in a state where the contact intermediate product 10 is attached to the housing 1, the contact intermediate product 10 does not enter the allowing portion (as shown in fig. 1). However, Yamazaki et al. does not explicitly disclose the method further comprises inserting a jig between the contact point 10e and the facing portion 10f of the held portion and thereby causing plastic deformation of the contact intermediate product to form a contact; and after the plastic deformation, the tip portion is situated in the allowing portion at least in part and hidden by the movement suppression portion at least in part when viewed along the up-down direction.
On the other hand, Yamazaki et al. mentioned a mating connector is mateable to the connector which causing plastic deformation of the contact 10 and tip portion 10d of the contact 10 is located still in the allowing portion at least in part and hidden by the eave 8 (as shown in fig. 5). Although, Yamazaki et al. does not mention a jig between the contact point and the facing portion as recited above. However, a person having ordinary skill in the art would know that the mating connector would have done the same to cause plastic deformation also when the mating connector connects/engages with the connector.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to further modify the mating connector of Yamazaki et al. by having a jig between the contact point 10e and the facing portion 10f of the held portion and thereby causing plastic deformation of the contact intermediate product to form a contact; and after the plastic deformation, the tip portion is situated in the allowing portion at least in part and hidden by the movement suppression portion at least in part when viewed along the up-down direction as taught by the instant invention to further enhance a stable, and reliable of the deformation of the contact within the connector once matable with a mating connector.
Claim(s) 5-6 are as best understood and is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki et al. (JP2011065802) in view of Kim et al. (US 12057651).
As per claims 5-6: Yamazaki et al. discloses the connector (as shown in fig. 1), and the movement suppression portion 8 has a lower surface extending in a direction intersecting with the up and down direction (as shown in figs. 1, 5). However, Yamazaki et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein in a mated state where the mating connector and the connector are mated with each other, the tip portion extends in an obliquely downward direction; and wherein the bottom portion has no hole.
On the other hand, Yamazaki et al. mentioned the tip portion of the contact is a slightly upward and when in a mating contact is still within the allowing portion.
Kim et al. discloses a connector 1000, wherein a receptacle contact 1010 with a tip contact is slightly in downward direction (as shown in fig. 7) to further enhance a stable and reliable connection and can be more stably maintained within the allowing portion. Further, although neither Yamazaki et al. nor Kim et al. mentioned wherein the bottom portion has no hole, a person having ordinary skill in the art would know that the limitation above can only deal with omission of element because such modification still would not change the function of the connector or any impact to the functionality of the connector after all. Further, Applicant just simply recited the “no hole” limitation but no further described nor explained what it is for or what is the reason behind “no hole” in the bottom portion of the connector. Since, it has been held that omission of an element and its function in a combination where the remaining elements perform the same functions as before involves only routine skill in the art. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to further modify the mating connector of Yamazaki et al. by having the tip portion of the contact is a slightly upward and when in a mating contact is still within the allowing portion as taught by Kim et al. to further enhance a stable and reliable connection and can be more stably maintained within the allowing portion; and by having the bottom portion has no hole as taught by the instant invention can only deal with omission of an element and still would not change the function of the connector after all.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANG H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0288. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-6:30pm.
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 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.
/T.H.N/Examiner, Art Unit 2831 /ABDULLAH A RIYAMI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights