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 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In view of the preamble of claim 1, it seems that the preamble of claim 9 forgot to recite the claimed invention such that the preamble of claim 9 does not identify what the claimed invention is. Therefore, the examiner suggests the applicant to change “a first conductor, wherein” in claim 9, line 3 to -- a first conductor, the ring-shaped coil spring comprising --.
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 7 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kompa et al (US 9,909,636 B2).
Regarding claim 7, Kompa discloses a ring-shaped coil spring 100, the ring-shaped coil spring 100 being mounted around a conductor 170, the ring-shaped coil spring 100 comprising at least one ring-shaped spring 110 for increasing a contact load to the conductor 170, the at least one ring-shaped coil spring 100 being mounted along an inner circumferential side in coils 102 of the ring-shaped coil spring 100, wherein a load for compression inward in a radial direction by the at least one ring-shaped spring 110 can be adjusted by changing a number of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110 (see Fig. 7A showing one spring and see Fig. 10A showing two springs), by changing materials (see column 6, lines 50-63) of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110, by changing ring diameters (see column 5, lines 26-52) of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110, or by changing a number of turns (see column 6, lines 45-55) of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Kompa discloses a ring-shaped coil spring 100, (claim 9) the ring-shaped coil spring 100 being mounted around a second conductor 170 formed so as to be inserted and connected to a first conductor 156, wherein at least one ring-shaped spring 122 is mounted along an outer circumferential side in coil 102 of the ring-shaped coil spring 100 so as to increase a contact load to the first conductor 152, wherein a load for compression outward in a radial direction by the at least one ring-shaped spring 110 can be adjusted by changing a number of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110 (see Fig. 7A showing one spring and see Fig. 10A showing two springs), by changing materials (see column 6, lines 50-63) of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110, by changing ring diameters (see column 5, lines 26-52) of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110, or by changing a number of turns (see column 6, lines 45-55) of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110; and (claim 10) wherein another ring-shaped spring 124 than the at least one ring-shaped spring 122 is mounted along an inner circumferential side in the coils 102 of the ring-shaped coil spring 100, so as to increase a contact load to the second conductor 170.
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) 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakauchi et al (US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0266120 A1) in view of Kompa et al (US 9,909,636 B2).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Nakauchi discloses a ring-shaped coil spring, (claim 7) the ring-shaped coil spring C1-C3 being mounted around a conductor 5, the ring-shaped coil spring C1-C3 for increasing a contact load to the conductor 5; (claim 8) wherein the conductor 5 is a contactor that clamps and fixes two conductors 2 and 50 (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Nakauchi discloses a ring-shaped coil spring B1, (claim 9) the ring-shaped coil spring B1 being mounted around a second conductor 2 formed so as to be inserted and connected to a first conductor 1.
However, Nakauchi does not disclose the ring-shaped coil spring comprising (claim 9) at least one ring-shaped spring for increasing a contact load to the conductor, the at least one ring-shaped spring being mounted along an inner circumferential side in coils of the ring-shaped coil spring, wherein a load for compression inward in a radial direction by the at least one ring-shaped spring can be adjusted by changing a number of the at least one ring-shaped spring, by changing materials of the at least one ring-shaped spring, by changing ring diameters of the at least one ring-shaped spring, or by changing a number of turns of the at least one ring- shaped spring; and (claim 10) wherein another ring-shaped spring 124 than the at least one ring-shaped spring 122 is mounted along an inner circumferential side in the coils 102 of the ring-shaped coil spring 100, so as to increase a contact load to the second conductor 170.
On the other hand, Kompa discloses a ring-shaped coil spring 100 comprising (claim 9) at least one ring-shaped spring 110 for increasing a contact load to the conductor 170, the at least one ring-shaped coil spring 100 being mounted along an inner circumferential side in coils 102 of the ring-shaped coil spring 100, wherein a load for compression inward in a radial direction by the at least one ring-shaped spring 110 can be adjusted by changing a number of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110 (see Fig. 7A showing one spring and see Fig. 10A showing two springs), by changing materials (see column 6, lines 50-63) of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110, by changing ring diameters (see column 5, lines 26-52) of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110, or by changing a number of turns (see column 6, lines 45-55) of the at least one ring-shaped spring 110; and (claim 10) wherein another ring-shaped spring 124 than the at least one ring-shaped spring 122 is mounted along an inner circumferential side in the coils 102 of the ring-shaped coil spring 100, so as to increase a contact load to the second conductor 170.
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 ring-shaped coil spring taught by Nakauchi such that it would have a ring-shaped spring mounted along an outer circumferential side and another ring-shaped spring mounted along an inner circumferential side in coils of the ring-shaped coil spring as taught by Kompa to increase a contact load to the conductor from both outer and inner circumferential sides in coils of the ring-shaped coil spring.
Regarding claims 11-14 reciting, “A switchgear comprising the ring-shaped coil spring of switchgear” according to one of claims 7-10, both Nakauchi and Kompa do not disclose the ring-shaped coil spring being used in a switchgear.
Only the other hand, it is clear from teachings from both Nakauchi and Kompa that the ring-shaped coil spring can be used other than switchgear because Nakauchi and Kompa disclose two different types of electrical connectors using the ring-shaped coil spring. Therefore, it is clear that the ring-shaped coil spring is not limited just to be used with the switchgear only but can be used with many different types of electrical connectors.
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 ring-shaped coil spring taught by either Nakauchi and Kompa such that it would be used in a switchgear as taught by the instant invention because the ring-shaped coil spring is not limited to be used with the switchgear only but can be used with many different types of electrical connectors. Electrical connectors taught by both Nakauchi and Kompa also use the ring-shaped coil spring.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 08/07/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that Kompa discloses a canted coil spring. It seems that the applicant is arguing that the canted coil spring does not correspond to the recited coil spring of Claims 7, 9 and 10.
The examiner disagrees with the applicant because the claim limitations of claims 7, 9 and 10 simply recite, “ring-shaped coil spring”. The drawings of Kompa clearly show the coil spring 100 having a ring-shaped spring. Therefore, the coil spring of Kompa is a ring-shaped coil spring, which meets the ring-shaped coil spring recited in claims 7, 9 and 10.
The applicant further argues that both Kompa and Nakauchi do not disclose or suggest the newly added limitations in claims 7 and 9.
The examiner disagrees with the applicant because Kompa clearly teaches and discloses all the newly added limitations recited in claims 7 and 9. See all the paragraphs pointed out in the above rejections that correspond to all the newly added limitations recited in claims 7 and 9.
In conclusion, Kompa and Nakauchi clearly disclose all the limitations recited in the amended claims 7-14 filed on 08/07/2026.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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