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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following problems.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the electrical connector, the mating connector, the cable feedthrough opening, the connection opening, at least one contact element, and a locking hook must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the entire structure of the connector and the mating connector. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Figures 1-3 only show partial views of the connector housing 1 and the mating connector housing 1’. Therefore, it is not clear what type of electrical connector that the connector housing 1 and the mating connector housing 1’ belong to and which parts of the connector housing 1 and the mating connector housing 1’ are cut to show the partial views shown in Figures 1-3.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “3’”, “4’” and “5’” shown in Figure 3.
In Figure 3, it seems that the reference number “63” for the locking element of the fastener body 60’ should be -- 63’ -- since this locking element belongs to the fastener body 60’ of the mating connector housing 1’
Paragraph [0037], line 7 describes, “A fixing element 61 is arranged in the fastener body 60.” However, Paragraph [0038], lines 6-7 describe, “The second fastener 6’ has a fixing element 61 on its fastener body 60’ …” Therefore, it seems that present specification describes two different fixing elements with the same reference number, one fixing element 61 with the fastener body 60 of the connector housing 1 and another fixing element 61 with the fastener body 60’ of the mating connector housing 1’. However, Figure 3 shows only one fixing element 61 in between the fastener body 60 of the connector housing 1 and the fastener body 60’ of the mating connector housing 1’. In conclusion, it is not clear and indefinite whether the present invention includes only one fixing element or two different fixing elements.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “61” has been used to designate both first fixing element and second fixing element.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the electrical connector, the mating connector, the cable feedthrough opening, the connection opening, at least one contact element, and a locking hook.
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 1-14 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 1, line 1 recites the claimed invention is an electrical connector. First, because the drawings only show small cross-sectional view portions of the electrical connector and do not show entire structures of the whole electrical connector and all the components of the electrical connector, it is very difficult to understand and what part of the electrical connector is cut away to show the cross-sectional views of the drawings. Second, many elements such as a cable feedthrough opening, a connection opening; at least one contact element and/or at least one connector module and/or a half connector module; and a locking hook are not shown, it is not clear how these missing elements are structurally formed with the all the elements shown in the cross-sectional view of the drawings.
In claim 1, most elements are simply listed in claim 1 without reciting how each element is structurally related to each other and intended function or purpose of each element.
Claim 1, line 4 recites, “a first retention feature (2)”. It is not clear and indefinite what is being retained by this first retention feature. Claim 10, line 2 also recites the same limitation as claim 1, line 4. Therefore, claim 10 also has the same problem as claim 1.
Claim 1, line 5 recites, “a contact insert (3)”. It is not clear whether this contact insert is an actual electrical contact itself or an element for helping an actual contact to be inserted into the connector housing (1). Claim 10, line 1 also recites the same limitation as claim 1, line 5. Therefore, claim 10 also has the same problem as claim 1.
Claim 1, lines 10-11 recite, “the second retention feature (5) corresponds to the first retention feature (2)”. It is not clear and indefinite how the first and second retention features correspond or work together. Is the second retention feature retaining to the first retention feature or the first and second retention features are working together to retain something? Claim 10, lines 4-5 also recite the same limitation as claim 1, lines 10-11. Therefore, claim 10 also has the same problem as claim 1.
Claim 1, lines 12-13 recite, “a fastener (6) interacts with the first retention feature (2) and the second retention feature (5)”. It is not clear and indefinite how the fastener is interacting with the first and second retention features. Is the fastener fastening or fixing the first retention feature to the second retention feature?
Claim 1, lines 16-19 recite that the fastener (6) has a fastener body (60), a fixing element (61), and a locking element (63). It is not clear and indefinite how these three elements (60), (61), (63) of the fastener (6) are structurally related to each other to form the fastener (6) and structurally related to all other elements recited in claim 1. Also, it is not clear and indefinite what the functions or purposes of the three elements are and how three elements are working together as the fastener (6). Claim 10, lines 8-9 also recite the same limitation as claim 1, lines 16-19. Therefore, claim 10 also has the same problem as claim 1.
In claim 3, it is clear that the locking element (63) is connected to the second retention feature (5). But it is not clear and indefinite what the locking element locks. A person having ordinary skill in the art would assume that the element (63) performs a locking function just by looking at the name of this element, which is “locking element (63)”. However, claim 3 does not recite what is being locked by this locking element (63).
Claim 5, line 2 recites, “a locking hook”. Since this locking hook is not assigned with a reference number and a line pointing at the locking hook with the assigned reference number, it is not clear and indefinite to locate this locking hook, what this locking hook looks like, and what element that this locking hook locks to and hooks to.
Claim 8 and 13, lines 2-3 recite, “at least a first fastener (6’) and a least a second fastener (6”)”. First, it is not clear and indefinite where at least first and second fasteners come from because claim 8 suddenly recites at least first and second fasteners. Second, since claim 1, line 12 also recites, “a fastener (6)”, it is not clear and indefinite whether the fastener (6) of claim 1 and at least the first fastener (6’) of claim 8 are the same fastener or two different fasteners.
Claim 9, line 2 recites, “a second fixing element (61)”, but claim 1, line 18 also recites, “a fixing element (61)”. Commonly one reference number is assigned to one element, and the same reference number is not assigned to two different elements. Therefore, it is not clear and indefinite whether the fixing element of claim 1 and the second fixing element of claim 9 are the same fixing element or two different fixing elements.
Claim 13, line 4 recites that the second fastener 6” has a second fixing elements 61, but claim 10, line 8 recites that the fastener 6 has a fastener body 60, a fixing element 61.
Claim 14 recites that the first fastener 6 and the second fastener 6’ are used as coding. It is not clear and indefinite what kind of coding is generated by the first and second fasteners. Also, it is not clear and indefinite how the first and second fasteners are being used as coding.
The claims have not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible indefiniteness problems. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the claims.
Conclusion
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