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 .
Double Patenting
Claim 1 – 4 and 10 – 13 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 13 of copending Application No. 18/735,659 (reference application).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 13 of App. ‘659 claims the indicator element as visible in multiple lock locations as recited in the text of claim 1, and that the indicator element moves from one viewing area into another viewing area under a cutout as recited in the text of claim 13. This change in viewing area with such movement is a change in field of view. Furthermore, the indicator element is recited as being placed on the clamping element and being moved, thus the indicator element is understood to be placed on a manipulation element.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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)(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.
Claims 1 – 4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. No. 12,294,184 (“Caldwell”).
Regarding claim 1, Caldwell discloses a securing device for securing a lock of a locking element, comprising:
the locking element (118 and 124, see the locking of 124 with the projection at position A after 118 is moved and causes 124 to rotate into engagement with the projection) configured to move from a first locking position (the position seen in Fig. 1) into a second locking position (the position seen in Fig. 3), the locking element configured to lock in the second locking position (see Figs. 9 and 10);
an indicator element (112) including an identifying feature (the coded information of 112) configured to indicate an item of information (col. 4, lns. 33 – 35), the identifying feature is visible within a first field of view in the first locking position of the locking element (112 is visible in the FOV defined by aperture 120 in the position seen in Fig. 1), and in the second locking position of the locking element, the identifying feature is visible within a second field of view (112 is visible in the FOV defined by aperture 126 in the position seen in Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
372
513
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Caldwell discloses wherein, in both the first locking position and the second locking position of the locking element, the identifying feature is not concealed and remains visible (112 is visible in both positions, see Figs. 1 and 3).
Regarding claim 3, Caldwell discloses wherein the first field of view and the second field of view includes different viewing areas (the viewing area of the second FOV of aperture 126 is wider).
Regarding claim 4, Caldwell discloses a manipulation element (the gearing structure of 1118 and 124) configured to change the first field of view to the second field of view when the locking element is moved from the first locking position to the second locking position (the apertures are moved into position to set the FOV as the locking elements slide/rotate).
Regarding claim 10, Caldwell discloses wherein the securing device is configured to perform connector position assurance (CPA) to secure a lock between a connector housing and a mating connector housing (the connectors 114/116 are locked and the position is assured at the position seen in Figs. 3/10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 5, the prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed securing device including wherein the manipulation element is configured to modify a reading direction such that the identifying feature is discernible when the locking element is moved from the first locking position to the second locking position, along with the remaining elements of the claim.
Regarding Claim 6, the prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed securing device including wherein the indicator element includes an indication plane and is configured to depict the identifying feature on the indication plane, the identifying feature is discernible within a first range of reading angles with respect to the indication plane in the first locking position and the first range of reading angles does not include a right angle to the indication plane, along with the remaining elements of the claim.
Caldwell discloses the securing element with two fields of view and the indicator element visible in the two fields, but the reading direction and/or reading angle is the same in each view, and includes a right angle to the indication plane. Furthermore, while the indicator is visible in each field of view, the indicator is not discernible in the first view because the information represented by the indicator element cannot be understood by a reader.
Regarding Claim 9, the prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed securing device wherein the identifying feature includes a code configured to indicate the item of information, the code is discernible within the first field of view in the first locking position, and the code is discernible within the second field of view in the second locking position, along with the remaining elements of the claim.
The prior art, when taken alone, or in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Demaratos, Scherer, Dawson, and Christiano disclose and teach securing devices with indicator elements, but do not disclose the field of view, reading direction and/or angle, or clamping structure as required by the claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL D BAILLARGEON whose telephone number is (571)272-0676. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m.
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 Luebke can be reached at (571) 272-2009.
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.
/PAUL D BAILLARGEON/Examiner, Art Unit 2831
/renee s luebke/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2831
