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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/06/2024 was filed after the mailing date of the application on 07/31/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
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, a plurality of second dielectrics each holding the distal end portion of each of the plurality of conductors to expose a distal end surface of each of the plurality of conductors to an outside and the plurality of second dielectrics are formed such that extending directions of the plurality of second dielectrics and the plurality of conductors change of claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 4-6, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lloyd et al. US 10424878.
Regarding claim 1, Lloyd discloses an electrical-connector-equipped cable, comprising: a cable (fig. 4a; 62) including a plurality of conductors (fig. 6; 119) and a first dielectric (fig. 6a; 124) covering the plurality of conductors (119) to expose a distal end portion (fig. 6a; exposed portions of 119) of each of the plurality of conductors (119); and a connector (fig. 4a; 105) including a plurality of second dielectrics (fig. 5c; 148 on both sides) each holding the distal end portion (exposed portions of 119) of each of the plurality of conductors (119) to expose a distal end surface (fig. 5d; 119a) of each of the plurality of conductors (119) to an outside, wherein the plurality of second dielectrics (148) are formed such that extending directions of the plurality of second dielectrics (148, 148 have a horizontal extending part and a vertical extending part) and the plurality of conductors (119, 119 extends downward and then outward) change while maintaining distances (distances between 119) between the plurality of conductors (119).
Regarding claim 4, Lloyd discloses wherein the connector (105) includes an electric conductor (fig. 4; 102) made of a conductive material, and where the plurality of second dielectrics (148) are provided in the electric conductor (102), and the extending directions of the plurality of second dielectrics (148) and the plurality of conductors (119) change in the electric conductor (102).
Regarding claim 5, Lloyd discloses wherein the distal end surface (119a) of each of the plurality of conductors (119) is positioned on the same plane (fig. 5c; plane the front surface of 148 is aligned with) with respect to an end surface (front surface of 148) of each of the second dielectrics (148).
Regarding claim 6, Lloyd discloses wherein the cable (62) includes a first shield member (fig. 6; 110) provided on the first dielectric (124), and the connector (105) includes a second shield member (fig. 6; 134) provided adjacent to the second dielectric (148).
Regarding claim 9, Lloyd discloses wherein the plurality of conductors (119) include at least one ground conductor (fig. 6; 120) configured to be connected to a ground, and a plurality of signal conductors (119) configured to propagate electric signals, wherein the plurality of signal conductors (119) is formed to be bent (119 are bent).
Regarding claim 10, Lloyd discloses wherein the connector (105) further includes a shield member (102) that covers the entire of the plurality of second dielectrics (148).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lloyd et al. US 10424878 in view of Matsuda et al. US 2022/0384998.
Lloyd discloses all of the claim limitations except wherein a relative permittivity of a dielectric material forming the second dielectric is a value from 0.9 to 1.1 with respect to a relative permittivity of a dielectric material forming the first dielectric.
However, Matsuda teaches a relative permittivity of a dielectric material (fig. 6; 980) forming the second dielectric is a value (Par [0075] Ln 4-6; 2-2.6) from 0.9 to 1.1 with respect to a relative permittivity (Par [0056] Ln 6-14; dielectric constant of polyethylene terephthalate resin is 3-3.6) of a dielectric material (polyethylene terephthalate resin) forming the first dielectric (22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate a relative permittivity of a dielectric material forming the second dielectric is a value from 0.9 to 1.1 with respect to a relative permittivity of a dielectric material forming the first dielectric as suggested by Matsuda for the benefit of improving electrical characteristics of an electrical signal for optimum signal quality.
Claim(s) 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lloyd et al. US 10424878 in view of Kojima et al. US 2021/0249803.
Regarding claim 7, Lloyd discloses wherein the plurality of second dielectrics (148) are formed such that extending directions of the plurality conductors (119) are bent.
Lloyd does not disclose the plurality of second dielectrics are formed such that extending directions of the plurality of second dielectrics are bent.
However, Kojima teaches the plurality of second dielectrics (fig. 7; 153, 120) are formed such that extending directions (extending directions of 153 and 120) of the plurality of second dielectrics (153, 120) are bent (120 is bent from 153).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the plurality of second dielectrics are formed such that extending directions of the plurality of second dielectrics are bent as suggested by Kojima for the benefit of improving the electrical and mechanical connections between a cable and connector.
Regarding claim 8, Lloyd and Kojima disclose (Kojima) wherein an angle (angle between 120 and 153) at which the plurality of second dielectrics (153, 120) are bent is between an undisclosed range.
Lloyd and Kojima do not disclose the angle being between 90 degrees and 150 degrees.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the angle being between 90 degrees and 150 degrees since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233, and also for the benefit of improving the electrical and mechanical connections between a cable and connector.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is 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 3, the prior art of record fails to disclose, teach, provide or suggest wherein each of the plurality of second dielectrics has a tubular shape in which one conductor of the plurality of conductors is disposed inside, and a space is formed between the plurality of second dielectrics combined with all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims from which claim 3 depends on.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCUS E HARCUM whose telephone number is (571)272-9986. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8am-5pm.
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 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.
/MARCUS E HARCUM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights