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 .
This application is a CIP of 18/621,257 03/29/2024.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 15, change “the free end” to --a free end--. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 2, 4, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu et al. (US 11664623 B2)
In regard to claim 1, Yu et al. discloses a connector 100 configured for mating with a docking connector, the connector 100 comprising:
a connecting body 12, wherein one end of the connecting body 12 has a docking interface 21, one side of the connecting body 12 has a locking structure 32, and the locking structure 32 is configured to engage with a docking lock structure of the docking connector;
a cover case 11, wherein one end of the cover case 11 is connected to the connecting body 12, and the cover case 11 further includes an elastic arm 3311 connected to a top portion of the cover case 11; and
a drawstring 5, wherein one end of the drawstring 5 is fixed to the elastic arm 3311, and another end of the drawstring 5 passes through a wall hole 1132 of the cover case 11;
wherein, when the drawstring 5 is pulled in a direction away from the cover case 11, the drawstring 5 moves the elastic arm 3311, so that one end of the locking structure 32 is pressed by a free end of the elastic arm 3311, and another end of the locking structure 32 is elastically deformed in a direction away (downward direction) from the docking lock structure of the docking connector.
In regard to claim 2, Yu et al. discloses an inner side of the free end of the elastic arm 3311 has a connection structure 41, the connection structure 41 is arranged adjacent to the locking structure 32, and the end of the drawstring 5 is fixed to the connection structure 41 (see fig. 7).
In regard to claim 4, Yu et al. discloses an outer lateral surface of the elastic arm 3311 protrudes from an outer lateral surface of the cover case 11, and wherein an inner side of the elastic arm 3311 includes a stop structure 3313, the stop structure 3313 is disposed adjacent to the connection structure 41, and the stop structure 3313 is configured to limit a movable range of the drawstring 5 fixed to the connection structure 41.
In regard to claim 7, Yu et al. discloses a rear wall of the cover case 11 connected to the connecting body12 (at 123, see fig. 5) has the wall hole 1132.
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) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al..
In regard to claim 12, Yu et al. does not disclose a linear distance between a position of the elastic arm configured to abut against the locking structure and a position of the elastic arm connected to the cover case is within a range from 7 mm to 20 mm.
Regarding the particular dimensions of the linear distance, to the extent that Yu et al.does not specify exact dimensions, at the time of the invention, workable dimensions of the linear distance would have been a matter of routine experimentation. In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618 (CCPA 1977). Variations in the distance would have been obvious minor adjustments without patentable significance. See In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955) (Where general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover optimal or workable ranges by routine experimentation).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-20 are allowed.
Claims 3, 5, 6, 8-11, 13 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: In regard to claim 3, the prior art fails to provide, teach or suggest wherein two ends of the elastic arm are respectively a connection end and the free end, and wherein a linear distance between a position of the connection structure connected to the elastic arm and the connection end is less than a linear distance between the position of the connection structure connected to the elastic arm and the free end. In regard to claim 5, the prior art fails to provide, teach or suggest
the cover is detachably disposed on another side of the body, wherein at least one side wall of the cover case has at least one wire hole, and the cover is detachably fixed to one side of the body that is different from the side having the wall hole. In regard to claim 8, the prior art fails to provide, teach or suggest the rear wall of the cover case further includes a limiting structure, the limiting structure is arranged in the wall hole. In regard to claim 10, the prior art fails to provide, teach or suggest an outer lateral surface of the elastic arm is flush with an outer lateral surface of the cover case. In regard to claim 11, the prior art fails to provide, teach or suggest at least one side wall of the cover case has a wire hole. In regard to claim 13, the prior art fails to provide, teach or suggest the docking interface has a plurality of hollow tubular structures. In regard to claim 14, the closest reference US 20230155315 A1 fails to provide, teach or suggest at least one wire hole formed on another one of the side walls of the cover case configured for the cables passing through; and a wall hole formed on the rear wall of the cover case configured for the drawstring passing through.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THO D. TA whose telephone number is (571)272-2014. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4:30PM EST.
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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached at (571) 272-3560. 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.
Tdt
8/22/2026
/THO D TA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights