DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the amendment filed on 7/13/2026.
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:
Claim 9 recites “The mating port of claim 1, wherein wherein the first axial distance…”. It should be amended to “The mating port of claim 1, wherein the first axial distance…”. It appears to be a typographical error.
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 10, 15, 24 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.
Claim 10, recites “further comprising a gap between the rear ramp and the front support member”. However, the term “front support member” lacks antecedent basis. The Examiner will interpret the claim as the front support member having antecedent basis, however, appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 recites “wherein the outer contour of said threadless body is smooth”. However, the term “outer contour” lacks antecedent basis. The Examiner will interpret the claim as the contour of the threadless body having antecedent basis, however, appropriate correction is required.
Claim 24, line 23, recites “wherein the second flat surface has an outer the first flat surface”. This limitation is unclear because it is grammatically incomplete and does not convey a reasonably clear relationship between the second flat surface and the first flat surface. Applicant is required to amend the claim to clearly set forth the intended relationship between the second flat surface and the first flat surface. For examination purposes, the Examiner will interpret the claim as requiring the second flat surface having a smaller outer diameter than the first flat surface.
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)(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) 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 12, 14 – 16, 18, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watkins (US 20150180183).
Regarding claim 1, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) a mating port defining an axial direction (direction of 400A) and comprising:
a threadless body (TB) comprising:
a leading body portion (LB),
a rear body portion (RB), and
an intermediate body portion (IB) between the leading body portion (LB) and the rear body portion (RB),
wherein the leading body portion (LB) comprises a leading end surface (ES) at a front end of the threadless body (TB), the leading end surface facing the axial direction (direction of 400A),
wherein the leading body portion (LB) comprises a leading ramp (LR) that includes a first leading surface (see surface between LR and ES in the annotation) and a first flat surface (see surface where LR is pointing to in annotation),
wherein the first leading surface (see surface between LR and ES in the annotation) is sloped and extends radially outward to the first flat surface (see surface where LR is pointing to in the annotation),
wherein the first flat surface (see surface where LR is pointing to in annotation) is parallel to the axial direction (direction of 400A),
wherein the intermediate body portion (IB) comprises a reduced body portion (RBP),
wherein a second flat surface (see flat surface where RB is pointing to in the annotation) is disposed rearward of the reduced body portion (RBP),
wherein the second flat surface (see flat surface where RB is pointing to in the annotation) is parallel to the axial direction (direction of 400A),
wherein the reduced body portion (RBP) has a diameter smaller (see annotation) than the first flat surface (see surface where LR is pointing to in annotation) and the second flat surface (see flat surface where RB is pointing to in the annotation),
wherein a first axial distance (AD1) between the leading end surface (ES) and a rear end of the leading ramp (LR) is less than a second axial distance (AD2) from the rear end of the leading ramp (LR) to a rear end of the second flat surface (see flat surface where RB is pointing to in the annotation),
wherein the leading ramp (LR), the reduced body portion (RBP), and the second flat surface (see flat surface where RB is pointing to in the annotation) define an outer contour (outer contour of TB) of said threadless body (TB), the outer contour (outer contour of TB) configured to engage a displacement member under tension of a mating connector (i.e. disclosed contour is capable of engaging a displacement member under tension).
~ Please see annotation of figure 14 in the Watkins reference, where the threadless body TB, the leading body portion LB, the rear body portion RB, the intermediate body portion IB, the leading end surface ES, the leading ramp LR, the reduced body portion RBP, the rear ramp RR, the first trailing surface TS, the first axial distance AD1, and the second axial distance AD2 can be seen.
PNG
media_image1.png
504
509
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 1, wherein said mating port (see figure 14) comprises a female port (see figure 14; 410
has the structural characteristics of a female port and therefore reads on “female port” under BRI).
Regarding claim 4, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 1, said reduced body portion (RBP) comprising one or more annular grooves (there is one
annular groove, see IB in annotation) positioned in the outer surface of said intermediate body portion (IB) directly behind said leading ramp (LR).
Regarding claim 5, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 1, wherein the outer contour (contour of TB) of said threadless body (TB) has a shape that
cooperates with the displacement member as the mating connector is slidably engaged with said mating port (i.e. shape of contour of TB is capable of cooperating with a displacement member as the mating connector is slidably engaged with said mating port).
Regarding claim 7, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 1, further comprising a rear ramp (RR) at the rear body portion (RB) of said body (TB),
said rear ramp (RR) projecting outward with respect to the outer surface of said intermediate body portion (IB).
Regarding claim 9, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 1, wherein wherein the first axial distance (AD1) is less than a third axial distance (see
annotation) from the rear end of the leading ramp (LR) to a front end of the second flat surface (see flat surface where RB is pointing to in the annotation).
Regarding claim 12, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 1, wherein the leading ramp (LR) further comprises a trailing surface (TS) extending rearward and radially inward from the first flat surface (see surface where LR is pointing to in
annotation), the trailing surface (TS) being configured to engage the displacement member under tension (i.e. disclosed TS is capable of engaging a displacement member under tension).
Regarding claim 14, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port comprising: a threadless body (TB) comprising:
a leading body portion (LB),
a rear body portion (RB), and
an intermediate body portion (IB) between the leading body portion (LB) and the rear body portion (RB),
wherein the intermediate body portion (IB) has a first flat surface (see flat surface of IB between LR and RR in the annotation) that extends parallel to the axial direction (direction of 400A),
wherein the rear body portion (RB) comprises a rear ramp (RR), the rear ramp (RR) having a second flat surface (flat surface located where RB is pointing to in the annotation)
and a leading surface (surface of RR) at a leading end of the second flat surface (flat surface located where RB is pointing to in the annotation),
wherein the leading surface is sloped (surface of RR is sloped) and extends outward from the first flat surface (see flat surface of IB between LR and RR in the annotation) of the intermediate body portion (IB) to the second flat surface (flat surface located where RB is
pointing to in the annotation) and is configured to engage a displacement member under tension of a mating male connector (i.e. disclosed leading surface is capable of engaging a displacement member under tension of a mating male connector).
Regarding claim 15, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 14, wherein the outer contour (contour of TB) of said threadless body is smooth (i.e. see
figure 14, there are no threads in 410; Examiner interpreted “smooth” as “threadless” per ¶0057 in the spec of current application).
Regarding claim 16, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 14, wherein the leading body portion (LB) comprises a leading ramp (LR) that has an
outer diameter than is greater than the first flat surface (flat surface where IB is pointing to in annotation) of the intermediate body portion (IB), the leading ramp (LR) being configured to
engage the displacement member under tension of the mating male connector (i.e. disclosed leading ramp is capable of engaging the displacement member under tension of the mating male connector).
Regarding claim 18, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 16, wherein the intermediate portion (IB) comprises one or more annular grooves (there is one annular groove, see IB in annotation) positioned directly behind the leading ramp (LR).
Regarding claim 19, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 16, further comprising an angled surface (TS) at a trailing side of said leading ramp (LR),
the angled surface configured to engage the displacement member under tension (disclosed angled surface is capable of engaging a displacement member under tension).
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(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watkins (US 20150180183) in view of Applicant Admitted Prior Art (“AAPA”, Background of specification).
Regarding claim 3, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 1.
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose wherein said mating port comprises an F- type port.
However, Applicant’s specification acknowledges that F-type ports are conventional components of F type connectors and that conventional F type connectors include a female or mating port (See AAPA in Background in the Specification). Such statements constitute an admission of the state of the art. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to implement the mating port of Watkins as an F-type port, as evidenced by Applicant’s admission that F-type ports were known and conventional, in order to provide a mating port according to a known connector standard.
Claim(s) 6, 8, 10, 11, 17, 20 – 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watkins (US 20150180183) in view of Maki (US 20120252282).
Regarding claim 6, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 1, wherein the leading end surface (ES) defines a leading interface surface (ES is a leading interface surface).
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose whereby said leading ramp cooperates with the displacement member to apply a forward insertion pressure that engages the leading interface surface with a mating interface surface of a male connector.
Maki teaches (figures 1 – 15, annotation) a connector whereby said leading ramp (33R) cooperates with the displacement member (20) to apply a forward insertion pressure that engages the leading interface surface with a mating interface surface of a male connector (i.e. disclosed leading ramp surface is capable of cooperating with 20 to apply a forward insertion pressure that engages both connectors together).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the mating arrangement of Watkins to include whereby said leading ramp cooperates with the displacement member to apply a forward insertion pressure that engages the leading
interface surface with a mating interface surface of a male connector as taught by Maki, in order to securely retain the mating connector.
Regarding claim 8, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the leading ramp (LR) the mating port of claim 7.
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose wherein said rear ramp cooperates with the displacement member to apply a pressure that provides a radio frequency seal between a female port of the mating port and a mating male connector.
Maki teaches (figures 1 – 15, annotation) a connector wherein said rear ramp (31) cooperates with the displacement member (20) to apply a pressure that provides a radio
frequency seal between a female port of the mating port and a mating male connector (i.e. disclosed ramp is capable of cooperating with a displacement member to apply pressure for a seal between the female port and the mating male connector).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the mating arrangement of Watkins with the mating arrangement as disclosed by Maki to
provide wherein said rear ramp cooperates with the displacement member to apply a pressure that provides a radio frequency seal between a female port of the mating port and a mating
male connector, in order to provide a tensioned engagement between the mating connectors, thereby improving retention during engagement.
Regarding claim 10, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 9.
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose further comprising a gap between the rear ramp and the front support member.
Maki teaches (figures 1 – 15, annotation) a connector further comprising a gap (see gap in figure 7(D)) between the rear ramp (31) and the front support member (22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the connector arrangement of Watkins with the connector mating arrangement as disclosed by Maki to provide a gap between the rear ramp and the front support member, in order
to provide the necessary clearance between the respective components and thereby permit relative movement of the components during mating.
Regarding claim 11, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 1.
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose wherein the displacement member is a spring.
Maki teaches (figures 1 – 15, annotation) a connector wherein the displacement member (20) is a spring (20 is inherently a spring; ¶0007).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the mating arrangement of Watkins with the mating arrangement as disclosed by Maki to provide wherein the displacement member is a spring, in
order to provide a tensioned engagement between the mating connectors, thereby improving retention during engagement.
Regarding claim 17, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 16, said threadless body (TB) having a leading interface surface (ES).
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose whereby said leading ramp cooperates with the displacement member to apply a forward insertion pressure that engages the leading interface surface with a mating interface surface of a male connector.
Maki teaches (figures 1 – 15, annotation) a connector whereby said leading ramp (33R) cooperates with the displacement member (20) to apply a forward insertion pressure that engages the leading interface surface with a mating interface surface of a male connector (i.e. disclosed
leading ramp surface is capable of cooperating with 20 to apply a forward insertion pressure that engages both connectors together).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the mating arrangement of Watkins to include whereby said leading ramp cooperates with the displacement member to apply a forward insertion pressure
that engages the leading interface surface with a mating interface surface of a male connector as taught by Maki, in order to securely retain the mating connector.
Regarding claim 20, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 14.
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose wherein said rear ramp cooperates with the displacement member to apply a pressure that provides a radio frequency seal between a female port of the mating port and a mating male connector.
Maki teaches (figures 1 – 15, annotation) a connector wherein said rear ramp (31) cooperates with the displacement member (20) to apply a pressure that provides a radio
frequency seal between a female port of the mating port and a mating male connector (i.e. disclosed ramp is capable of cooperating with a displacement member to apply pressure for a seal between the female port and the mating male connector).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the mating arrangement of Watkins with the mating arrangement as disclosed by Maki to provide wherein said rear ramp cooperates with the
displacement member to apply a pressure that provides a radio frequency seal between a female port of the mating port and a mating male connector, in order to provide a tensioned engagement between the mating connectors, thereby improving retention during engagement.
Regarding claim 21, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) the mating port of claim 14.
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose wherein the displacement member is a spring.
Maki teaches (figures 1 – 15, annotation) a connector wherein the displacement member (20) is a spring (20 is inherently a spring; ¶0007).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the mating arrangement of Watkins with the mating arrangement as disclosed by Maki to provide wherein the displacement member is a spring, in
order to provide a tensioned engagement between the mating connectors, thereby improving retention during engagement.
Regarding claim 22, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) a method comprising: providing the mating port of claim 1.
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose providing a male connector with a displacement member; and engaging the outer contour of the threadless body with the displacement member under tension.
Maki teaches (figures 1 – 15, annotation) the method of providing a male connector (1) with a displacement member (20); and engaging the outer contour (contour of 32R) of the threadless body (body of 2 in figure 6) with the displacement member (20; see figures 7(A) –
7(D)) under tension (i.e. tension is inherent when 2 is inserted into 1 due to spring displacement from initial position in figure 7(A) to final position in figure 7(D)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the mating arrangement of Watkins to include the
displacement member and the engagement under tension as taught by Maki, in order to securely retain the mating connector when it is connected to the mating port.
~ Please see annotation of figure 6 in the Maki reference, where the leading ramp 33R, and the outer contour 32R can be seen.
PNG
media_image2.png
342
641
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 23, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) a method comprising: providing the mating port of claim 14.
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose providing a male connector with a displacement member; and engaging an outer contour of the threadless body with the displacement member under tension.
Maki teaches (figures 1 – 15, annotation) the method of providing a male connector (1) with a displacement member (20); and engaging the outer contour (contour of 32R) of the
threadless body (body of 2 in figure 6) with the displacement member (20; see figures 7(A) – 7(D)) under tension (i.e. tension is inherent when 2 is inserted into 1 due to spring displacement from initial position in figure 7(A) to final position in figure 7(D)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the mating arrangement of Watkins to include the
displacement member and the engagement under tension as taught by Maki, in order to securely retain the mating connector when it is connected to the mating port.
Claim(s) 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watkins (US 20150180183) in view of Oldford (US 4863202).
Regarding claim 24, Watkins teaches (figure 14, see annotation) a mating port defining an axial direction (direction of 400A) and comprising:
a threadless body (TB) comprising:
a leading body portion (LB),
a rear body portion (RB), and
an intermediate body portion (IB) between the leading body portion (LB) and the rear body portion (RB),
wherein the leading body portion (LB) defines a leading ramp (LR), the leading ramp (LR) having a first flat surface (see surface where LR is pointing to in annotation), and a first leading surface (see surface between LR and ES in the annotation) and a first trailing surface
(TS) at opposite axial ends of the first flat surface (see surface where LR is pointing to in annotation),
wherein the first leading surface (see surface between LR and ES in the annotation) is sloped (see annotation) and extends radially outward (see annotation) from a leading end of the
leading body portion (LB) to the first flat surface (see surface where LR is pointing to in annotation),
wherein the first flat surface (see surface where LR is pointing to in annotation) extends parallel to the axial direction (direction of 400A),
wherein the first trailing surface (TS) is sloped (see annotation) and extends radially inward (see annotation) from the first flat surface (see surface where LR is pointing to in
annotation) towards a first annular groove (annular groove between TS and RR in the annotation).
But Watkins does not explicitly disclose wherein the intermediate body portion defines a center ramp, the center ramp having a second flat surface, and a second leading surface and a second trailing surface at opposite axial ends of the second flat surface, wherein the second
leading surface is sloped and extends radially outward from the first annular groove to the second flat surface, wherein the second flat surface extends parallel to the axial direction,
wherein the second trailing surface is sloped and extends radially inward from the second flat surface towards a second annular groove, wherein the second flat surface has an outer the first
flat surface, and wherein the leading ramp, the first annular groove, the center ramp, and the second annular groove define an outer contour of said threadless body, the outer contour configured to engage a displacement member under tension of a mating connector.
Oldford teaches (figure 3, annotation) a connector wherein the intermediate body portion (IBP) defines a center ramp (CR), the center ramp (CR) having a second flat surface
(see flat surface CR is pointing to in the annotation), and a second leading surface (see tapered surfaces on opposite sides of CR) and a second trailing surface (see tapered surfaces
on opposite sides of CR) at opposite axial ends of the second flat surface (see flat surface CR is pointing to in the annotation),
wherein the second leading surface (see tapered surfaces on opposite sides of CR) is sloped and extends radially outward from the first annular groove (GR1) to the second flat surface (see flat surface CR is pointing to in the annotation),
wherein the second flat surface (see flat surface CR is pointing to in the annotation) extends parallel to the axial direction (see figure 3),
wherein the second trailing surface (see tapered surfaces on opposite sides of CR) is sloped and extends radially inward from the second flat surface towards a second annular groove (GR2),
wherein the second flat surface has an outer the first flat surface (see figure 3)
wherein the leading ramp (per the combination of Watkins), the first annular groove (GR1), the center ramp (CR), and the second annular groove (GR2) define an outer contour of said threadless body (per the combination of Watkins), the outer contour (per the combination of Watkins) configured to engage a displacement member under tension of a mating connector (i.e. disclosed contour is capable of engaging a displacement member under tension of a mating connector).
Although Oldford teaches that the outer diameter of the second flat surface is the same as the outer diameter in the first flat surface, it would have been obvious to modify the relative outer diameters of the first and second flat surfaces such that the second flat surface has a smaller outer diameter than the first flat surface. Such modification represents a change in relative dimensions of the known connector configuration and would have been within ordinary skill in the art. (See MPEP 2144 (IV) - A). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Watkins with the connector as disclosed by Oldford to provide the center ramp, the second leading surface, the second flat surface, the second trailing surface, the first annular groove and the second annular groove, as taught by Oldford to improve the connector’s coupling reliability.
~ Please see annotation of figure 3 in the Oldford reference, where the center ramp CR, the first annular groove GR1, the second annular groove GR2, and the intermediate body portion IBP can be seen.
PNG
media_image3.png
284
390
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10 – 20, filed on 7/13/2026, with respect to the drawing objections and the objection to the specification have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the drawings has been withdrawn. The objection of the specification has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejections of claim(s) 1 – 23 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Carlos E. Lopez-Pagan whose telephone number is (703)756-5734. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30a - 5:00p.
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.
/CARLOS E LOPEZ-PAGAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights