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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
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 11-18 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 11, 14 and 17 recite the limitation "the installation area" in Lines 2, 3 and 3, respectively.
Claims 13-14 and 18 recite the limitation "the locking hooks" in Lines 1, 1 and 2, respectively.
Claim 15 recites the limitations "the recesses" and “the end” in Line 2.
Claim 16 recites the limitations "the extensions" in Line 3, "the end" in Line 3 and "the extensions lugs" in Line 4.
Claim 17 recites the limitations "the circumference" and “the unlocking tool” in Line 3.
Claim 18 recites the limitations "the mutually facing walls" in Line 1, “the arms” and “the extension lugs” in Line 2.
There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims.
Regarding claim 12, the phrase "particularly" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
Claims 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Draexlmaier (DE 3126742). Regarding Claim 10, Draexlmaier discloses a plug-in connection with at least one pin contact (Abstract) and/or with at least one socket contact, which are connected to a cable (5) and are in connection with a pin or socket housing (1), wherein the pin contact or the socket contact can be installed in the plug housing by means of an engagement (X), wherein the engagement is designed to be detachable in a non-destructive manner.
Regarding Claim 11, Draexlmaier discloses the pin contact or the socket contact being substantially cylindrical at least in the installation area (Fig. 2) of the plug housing and the installation area (Fig. 2) of the plug housing is substantially cylindrical.
Regarding Claim 12, Draexlmaier discloses the pin contact or the socket contact having a contact locking area (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 13, Draexlmaier discloses the locking hook(s) (13) having protruding extension lugs (14) from the plug housing or from the socket housing.
Regarding Claim 14, Draexlmaier discloses the locking hook(s) (13) and extension lugs (14) being arranged in recesses which are incorporated along the installation area (Fig. 2) of the plug housing.
Regarding Claim 15, Draexlmaier discloses extensions being provided in the recesses (Fig. 3) of the plug housing, which extensions extend from the end of the plug housing to the locking hooks (13).
Regarding Claim 16, Draexlmaier discloses the plug-in connection being assigned at least one unlocking tool (12) which has arms (Fig. 2) adapted to the extensions, wherein wedge-shaped bevels (15) are attached to the end of the arms, which release the locking hook(s) (13) from the locking ring when the extension lug(s) make contact.
Regarding Claim 17, Draexlmaier discloses three locking hooks (13) with extension lugs (14) and corresponding recesses (Fig. 3) and extensions (14) being provided distributed over the circumference of the installation area (Fig. 2), and in that the unlocking tool has a corresponding number of arms (Fig. 2) with bevels.
Regarding Claim 18, Draexlmaier discloses the mutually facing walls (Fig. 2) of the arms and/or the extension lugs (14) and/or the locking hooks (13) forming circumferential sections of a cylinder.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art discloses a plug-in connections, similar to Applicant’s claimed invention, having at least one pin contact and/or with at least one socket contact and the pin contact or the socket contact installed in the plug housing by means of an engagement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN A LEON whose telephone number is (571)272-2008. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-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, Renee S Luebke can be reached on 5712722009. 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.
/EDWIN A. LEON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights