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
Regarding claims 21 and 31, the use of "type" renders the claims indefinite because the claims include elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "type"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21 and 26 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 and 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,671,190. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims are not identical, the differences do not obviate the issue of double patenting. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member connected to contact assembly in order to provide a known efficient interface to a mating connector.
Claims 21 and 26 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,646,866. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims are not identical, the differences do not obviate the issue of double patenting. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member connected to contact assembly in order to provide a known efficient interface to a mating connector.
Claims 21 and 26 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,573,794. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims are not identical, the differences do not obviate the issue of double patenting. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member connected to contact assembly in order to provide a known efficient interface to a mating connector.
Claims 21 and 26 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,555,931. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims are not identical, the differences do not obviate the issue of double patenting. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member connected to contact assembly in order to provide a known efficient interface to a mating connector.
Claims 21 and 26 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,068,565. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims are not identical, the differences do not obviate the issue of double patenting. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member connected to contact assembly in order to provide a known efficient interface to a mating connector.
Claims 21 and 26 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 4 of copending Application No. 18/826,553 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims are not identical, the differences do not obviate the issue of double patenting. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member connected to contact assembly in order to provide a known efficient interface to a mating connector.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 21 and 26 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 8 of copending Application No. 18/122,600 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims are not identical, the differences do not obviate the issue of double patenting. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member connected to contact assembly in order to provide a known efficient interface to a mating connector.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 21 and 26 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 8 of copending Application No. 18/122,547 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims are not identical, the differences do not obviate the issue of double patenting. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member connected to contact assembly in order to provide a known efficient interface to a mating connector.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 21 and 26 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 21 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/764,838 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while the claims are not identical, the differences do not obviate the issue of double patenting. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member (instead of a blade) connected to contact assembly in order to provide a known efficient interface to a mating connector.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
Claims 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tedeschi (US 9,331,427) in view of Walter (US 7,004,781).
Regarding claim 21, Tedeschi discloses an electrical wiring device 10,100 (100 shows a plurality of device 10) comprising: a housing 20 and (fig. 10 housing not numbered) having an interior that is at least partially hollow, a plurality of wire openings (fig. 10), a plurality of actuator openings (for actuator 40) and (fig. 10), and a plurality of blade openings (for blades 33), (fig. 10), wherein each of the plurality of wire openings and each of the plurality of actuator openings provides access from an exterior of a rear of the housing to the hollow portion of the housing, and wherein each of the plurality of blade openings provides access from an exterior of a front of the housing to the hollow portion of the housing; and a plurality of contact assemblies 30, 30 positioned in the hollow portion of the housing such that one of the plurality of contact assemblies is accessible from one of the plurality of wire openings, one of the plurality of actuator openings and one of the plurality of blade openings (see fig. 2); wherein each of the plurality of the contact assemblies includes: a contact member 30 aligned with the one of the plurality of blade openings in the housing; a wire terminal 32 including a clamp brace electrically connected to the contact member and a clamping member 32 electrically connected to the clamp brace 38, the clamping member being movable between a closed position where a wire can be clamped by the clamping member, and an open position where the wire can be positioned so that the clamping member can clamp the wire to the wire terminal; and an actuator 40 extending at least partially through the one of the plurality of actuator openings in the housing, the actuator being interactive with the clamping member such that movement of the actuator in a first direction causes the actuator to move the clamping member from the closed position to the open position, and movement of the actuator in a second direction moves the clamping member from the open position to the closed position.
Tedeschi discloses substantially the claimed invention except for the female contact member. Walter discloses an electrical wiring device comprising contact assemblies including a female contact member (52) aligned with one of a plurality of blade openings in the housing (10) and configured to receive a blade of a blade-type electrical plug (intended use). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member, as taught by Walter, in order to provide the desired interface for the mating connector.
Regarding claim 22, Tedeschi discloses the clamping member being a clamp spring (32).
Regarding claim 23, Tedeschi discloses the clamping member remains in the closed position or the open position until the actuator being manually moved (Figs. 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 24, Tedeschi discloses the movement of the actuator in the second direction being opposite the movement of the actuator in the first direction.
Regarding claim 25, Tedeschi discloses the movement of the actuator in the first direction and the second direction is parallel to the clamp brace (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 26, Tedeschi discloses the movement of the actuator in the first direction and the second direction being linear (Figs. 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 27, Tedeschi discloses movement of the actuator in the first and second directions being relative to the clamping member (Figs 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 28, Tedeschi discloses movement of the actuator in the first direction is outward relative to the housing and wherein movement of the actuator in the second direction is inward relative to the housing (Figs. 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 29, Tedeschi discloses that when in the closed position the clamping member can clamp the wire to the wire terminal with a force that is substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the wire (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 30, Tedeschi discloses the electrical wiring device comprising one of a twist-lock receptacle, a duplex receptacle and a single receptacle (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 31, Tedeschi discloses (as noted above in claim 21) an electrical wiring device comprising 10, 100, a housing (figs 4 and 10) having an interior that is at least partially hollow, a plurality of wire openings, a plurality of actuator openings and a plurality of blade openings, wherein each of the plurality of wire openings and each of the plurality of actuator openings provides access from an exterior of a rear of the housing to the hollow portion of the housing, and wherein each of the plurality of blade openings provides access from an exterior of a front of the housing to the hollow portion of the housing; and a plurality of contact assemblies positioned in the hollow portion of the housing such that one of the plurality of contact assemblies is accessible from one of the plurality of wire openings, one of the plurality of actuator openings and one of the plurality of blade openings; wherein each of the plurality of the contact assemblies includes: a contact member aligned with the one of the plurality of blade openings in the housing; a wire terminal including a clamp brace electrically connected to the contact member and a clamping member electrically connected to the clamp brace, the clamping member being movable between a closed here a wire can be clamped by the clamping member, and an open position where the wire can be positioned so that the clamping member can clamp the wire to the wire terminal; and an actuator extending at least partially through the one of the plurality of actuator openings in the housing, the actuator being interactive with the clamping member such that movement of the actuator in a first direction from a first position to a second position causes the actuator to move the clamping member from the closed position to the open position, and movement of the actuator in a second direction permits the clamping member to automatically move from the open position to the closed position, wherein the clamping member remains in the closed position or the open position until the actuator is manually moved.
Tedeschi discloses substantially the claimed invention except for the female contact member. Walter discloses an electrical wiring device comprising contact assemblies including a female contact member (52) aligned with one of a plurality of blade openings in the housing (10) and configured to receive a blade of a blade-type electrical plug (intended use). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to use a female contact member, as taught by Walter, in order to provide the desired interface for the mating connector.
Regarding claim 32, Tedeschi discloses the clamping member being a clamp spring.
Regarding claim 33, Tedeschi discloses the movement of the actuator in the second direction being opposite the movement of the actuator in the first direction.
Regarding claim 34, Tedeschi discloses the movement of the actuator in the first direction and the second direction being parallel to the clamp brace.
Regarding claim 35, Tedeschi discloses the movement of the actuator in the first direction and the second direction being linear.
Regarding claim 36, Tedeschi discloses that the wire can be clamped by the clamping member such that the wire is clamped between the clamping member and the clamp brace.
Regarding claim 37, Tedeschi discloses that the wire can be clamped between the clamping member and the clamp brace with a force that is substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the wire so that the clamping member can press the wire against the clamp brace (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 38, Tedeschi discloses movement of the actuator in the first and second directions being relative to the clamping member.
Regarding claim 39, Tedeschi discloses movement of the actuator in the first direction being outward relative to the housing and wherein movement of the actuator in the second direction being inward relative to the housing.
Regarding claim 40, Tedeschi discloses the electrical wiring device comprising one of a twist-lock receptacle, a duplex receptacle and a single receptacle (Fig. 10).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection, as applied.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FELIX O FIGUEROA whose telephone number is (571)272-2003. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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 Luebke can be reached at (571)727-2009. 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.
/FELIX O FIGUEROA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights