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 .
Specification
Below are guidelines for the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Thus, the first sentence of the abstract is unnecessary, and could be combined with the second sentence to read “A server and electronic device that includes a housing, a hose...”
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 14, 18, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 9, and 14: “the other end” (claim 1, lines 6 and 9; claim 9, line3, claim 14, lines 7 and 10) technically lacks antecedent basis and should be changed to “another end” or “a second end”.
Claims 4, 8, and 18: “… the hose penetrates through and fixedly connected…” should be changed to either “and fixedly connects” or “and is fixedly connected”.
Claims 6 and 20: “the first vertical end face” (line 4) technically lacks antecedent basis and should be changed to “the at least one first vertical end face” or “a first vertical end face of the at least one first vertical end face”
Claim 11: “…is disposed on an end face of the mounting seat and facing away from the housing” (lines 4-5) should be changed to “…and faces away from…”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 8, 11, 14, 15, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukunaga (US 10,405,458 B2) in view of Saito et al. (US 10,985,510 B2). For clarity, bold text indicates claim language.
[Claim 1] Fukunaga teaches: An electronic device (Fukunaga, Fig. 1, element 10), comprising:
a housing (Fukunaga, Fig. 1, element 12);
a hose (Fukunaga, Fig. 1, element 20 or 22), wherein one end of the hose is located in the housing (Fukunaga, Fig. 1, elements 20 and 22 travel into the housing 12 through the holes in element 50);
a first connector (Fukunaga, Fig. 1-3, element 66) coupled to the other end of the hose (Fukunaga, Fig. 3, the hoses 20 and 22 attach to the first connector at element 66A) located outside the housing (Fukunaga, Fig. 3, element 6 is shown outside of the border of the housing 12);
a mounting bracket (Fukunaga, Fig. 4A, elements 82 and 84) located on an outer side of the housing (Fukunaga, Fig. 4A, shows the brackets 82 on the opposite side of housing 12 than element 14, which is within the housing 12) wherein one end of the mounting bracket is fixedly connected to the housing (Fukunaga, col. 5, line 17); and
a floating structure (Fukunaga, Fig. 2, elements 62, 86, 90, and 94) mounted on the other end of the mounting bracket (Fukunaga, Fig. 2, element 62F is limited by element 84), wherein the first connector is mounted on the floating structure (Fukunaga, Fig. 2-4, element 66 is shown extending out of element 62F away from housing 12), and the floating structure is movably connected to the mounting bracket (Fukunaga, Fig. 4B and 8B; col. 6, lines 40-45), and/or the first connector is movably connected to the floating structure.
Fukunaga does not teach a working medium through-flow hole or a sealing structure. Saito et al. teaches a connector that provides a seal around electrical wires running through a mounting hole in a panel or casing (Saito et al., Abstract; col. 3, lines 18-20). Specifically, Saito et al. teaches: a housing (Saito et al., Fig. 5A, element P) having a working medium through-flow hole disposed thereon (Saito et al., Fig. 5A, element H); electric wires fixedly connected to the housing at the working medium through flow hole by using a sealing structure (Saito et al., Fig. 5A, element 40) that seals a gap between the house and the housing (Saito et al., Abstract), wherein one end of the electric wires is located in the housing through the working medium through-flow hole (Saito et al., Fig. 5A and 5B, the wires 1 pass through the hole H so as to travel from one side to another of housing P).
Fukunaga is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of cooling systems entering electronic devices. Saito et al. is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it solves the same problem of sealing around connectors in a mounting hole in a case of a device. Although Saito et al. teaches the passage of wires and not hoses through a mounting hole, the structure of the connector could facilitate hoses or rods or any object with a circular cross-section (Saito et al., Fig. 3, element 21 passes through the connector and could be filled with any tube-like item of the appropriate size) Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the mounting bracket and housing of Fukunaga so that it included the working medium through-flow hole and sealing structure of Saito et al. This modification would be advantageous as it would provide a secure and waterproof connection between a hose of a cooling system and the housing of an electronic device.
[Claim 2] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. teaches: The electronic device according to claim 1. Saito et al. further teaches that the sealing structure (Saito et al., Fig. 5A and 5B, element 40) comprises a plug (Saito et al., Fig. 5A and 5B, element 20) disposed at the working medium through-flow hole (Saito et al., Fig. 5A, element H) and is fixedly connected to the housing (Saito et al., col. 3, lines 45-47). Based on the modifications to Fukunaga described in the claim 1 103 rejection above, the hose, rather than wires, penetrates through the plug (Saito et al., element 21 allows passage through element 20) and is fixedly connected to the plug (Saito et al., col. 3, lines 39-42), and the plug seals the gap between the hose and the housing (Saito et al., Fig. 5B, elements 23 and 43, col. 4, lines 43-47). Further, Saito et al. teaches that the plug is made of a synthetic resin sealed (Saito et al., col. 3, lines 33-35) and Fukunaga teaches that the hose could be made of rubber (Fukunaga, col. 3, lines 9-11). Pressing these two materials against each other when the hose is inserted into the sealing structure would produce a joint between the hose and the plug that is sealed.
[Claim 4] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. teaches: The electronic device according to claim 2. Saito et al. further teaches that the plug (Saito et al., Fig. 5A and 5B, element 20) comprises a plugging part (Saito et al., Fig. 5A and 5B, element 23) extending into the working medium through-flow hole (Saito et al., Fig. 5A and 5B). Based on the modifications to Fukunaga described in the claim 1 and 2 103 rejections above, the hose penetrates through and is fixedly connected to the plugging part (Saito et al., col. 3, lines 45-47), a joint between the hose and the plugging part is sealed (based on the materials of the hose and plugging part described in the claim 2 103 rejection above), and the plugging part seals a gap between the hose and a hole wall of the working medium through-flow hole (Saito et al., Fig. 5B, elements 23 and 43, col. 4, lines 43-47).
[Claim 8] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. teaches: The electronic device according to claim 4. Saito et al. further teaches that the plug further comprises a limiting part (Saito et al., Fig. 5A and 5B, element 22) disposed on an outer wall of the plugging part (Saito et al., Fig. 5A and 5B, element 22 extends outward from the body of the plugging part 23), and an end face that is of the limiting part and that faces an inner cavity of the housing abuts against the housing (Saito et al., Fig. 5B shows element 22 against element P), to limit movement of the plugging part towards a direction of the inner cavity of the housing (Saito et al., col. 4, lines 32-36). Based on the modifications to Fukunaga described in the claim 1, 2, and 4 103 rejections above, the hose penetrates through and is fixedly connected to the limiting part (Saito et al., col. 3, lines 39-42, the limiting part is fixedly connected to the plugging part), and a joint between the hose and the limiting part is sealed (based on the materials of the hose and plugging part, including the limiting part, described in the claim 2 103 rejection above).
[Claim 11] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. further teaches: The electronic device according to claim 1, wherein the first connector (Fukunaga, Fig. 3, element 66) comprises a first end (Fukunaga, Fig. 3, element 66A), a second end (Fukunaga, Fig. 3, element 66B), and a mounting part (Fukunaga, annotated in Fig. 3 below) located between the first end and the second end; and
the floating structure (Fukunaga, Fig. 2, elements 62, 86, 90, and 94) comprises a mounting seat (Fukunaga, Fig. 3 and 4A, element 62) mounted on the mounting bracket (Fukunaga, Fig. 4A, element 82), wherein a mounting groove is disposed on an end face of the mounting seat and faces away from the housing (Fukunaga, annotated in Fig. 3 below), a communication hole (Fukunaga, annotated in Fig. 3 below) penetrating through the mounting seat is disposed on a groove wall of the mounting groove and opposite to a groove opening (Fukunaga, annotated in Fig. 3 below), the mounting part is disposed in the mounting groove (Fukunaga, annotated Fig. 3 below), the first end is connected to the hose (Fukunaga, Fig. 3, element 66A and 20 or 22), and the second end is configured to connect to a working medium cooling system (Fukunaga, Fig. 4A, element 66B connects to element 40A which connects to elements 42 and 44 which are part of the working medium cooling system; col.
PNG
media_image1.png
527
645
media_image1.png
Greyscale
3, lines 45-52).
Claims 14, 16, and 18 are nearly identical to claims 1, 2, and 4. Thus, for the sake of brevity, the Examiner referenced these previous 103 rejections when relevant.
[Claim 14] Fukunaga teaches: A server (Fukunaga, Fig. 1, element 30), comprising:
An electronic device (Fukunaga in view of Saito et al., as described and modified in the claim 1 103 rejection above)
[Claim 16] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. teaches: The server according to claim 14, wherein the sealing structure comprises a plug (Fukunaga in view of Saito et al., as described and modified in the claim 2 103 rejection above)
[Claim 18] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. teaches: The server according to claim 16, wherein the plug comprises a plugging part (Fukunaga in view of Saito et al., as described and modified in the claim 4 103 rejection above).
[Claim 15] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. further teaches: The server according to claim 14, further comprising:
a working medium cooling system (Fukunaga, col. 3, lines 49-51); and
a second connector (Fukunaga, Fig. 4A, element 40A) corresponding to the first connector of the electronic device (Fukunaga, Fig. 4A, element 40A is inserted into element 66B), disposed on the working medium cooling system (Fukunaga, col. 3, lines 45-52), wherein the first connector is butt-jointed to the second connector (Fukunaga, Fig. 4A, elements 66B and 40A connect end-to-end), wherein the second connector is used by the working medium cooling system to input a cooling working medium to the electronic device through the first connector (Fukunaga, Fig. 1, 40A attaches to input pipe 42; col. 3, lines 45-52), or the second connector is used by the electronic device to output a cooling working medium to the working medium cooling system through the first connector (Fukunaga, Fig. 1, 40A attaches to output pipe 44; col. 3, lines 45-52).
Claims 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukunaga (US 10,405,458 B2) in view of Saito et al. (US 10,985,510 B2), as applied to claims 1, 2, 4, 14, and 18 above, and further in view of Kalbacher et al. (US 2014/0300105 A1). For clarity, bold text indicates claim language.
[Claim 5] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. teaches: The electronic device according to claim 4. Neither Fukunaga nor Saito et al. teaches that the hole wall of the working medium through-flow hole comprises a step structure. Kalbacher et al. teaches “a connection for a heat exchanger … including at least two seals” (Kalbacher et al., Abstract). More specifically, Kalbacher et al. teaches a housing (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 1) with a working medium through-flow hole (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 1, element 21) so that a coolant can enter the housing (Kalbacher et al., paragraph [0017]). The working medium through-flow hole (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 1, element 21) includes a hole wall (Fig. 3, the opening that receives element 4) that in turn comprises a step structure (Kalbacher et al., annotated Fig. 3 below) that abuts against a plugging part (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 4), to limit movement of the plugging part towards a direction of an inner cavity of the housing (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, the opening 31 prevents the plugging part 4a to move further into the opening 21
PNG
media_image2.png
747
722
media_image2.png
Greyscale
of the housing 1).
Kalbacher et al. is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of sealing plugs around cooling system inputs. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the mounting bracket and housing of Fukunaga so that the hose was connected to a sealing structure as taught by Saito et al. that plugged into a working medium through-flow hole with the step structure taught by Kalbacher et al. This modification would be advantageous as it would prevent the sealing structure from failing due to movement of the plugging part.
[Claim 6] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. and Kalbach et al. teaches: The electronic device according to claim 5. Fukunaga and Saito et al. do not teach details of the step structure. Kalbach et al. further teaches that the step structure (Kalbacher et al., annotated Fig. 3 above) of the working medium through-flow hole (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 1, element 21) comprises at least one first vertical end face (Kalbacher et al., annotated in Fig. 3 above); and
the sealing structure (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, elements 5 and 6) further comprises a sealing gasket (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 6) disposed between the at least one first vertical end face and the plugging part (Kalbacher et al., annotated in Fig. 3 above), the first vertical end face at the sealing gasket abuts against the plugging part by using the sealing gasket (Kalbacher et al., annotated Fig. 3 shows first vertical face abuts element 6 which abuts the plugging part 4a), and the sealing gasket seals a gap between the at least one first vertical end face at the sealing gasket and the plugging part (Kalbacher et al., paragraph [0030]).
Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the sealing gasket of Kalbacher et al. to the sealing structure of Saito et al. so that the plugging part seals the gap between the hose of Fukunaga and the hole wall of the working medium through-flow hole as taught by Kalbacher et al. This modification would be beneficial as the addition of the sealing gasket would both more firmly secure the plugging part to the hole wall and ensure the system was sealed against fluid and gas exchange outside of the hose.
[Claim 7] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. and Kalbach et al. teaches: The electronic device according to claim 5. Fukunaga and Saito et al. do not teach details of the step structure. Kalbach et al. further teaches that the step structure (Kalbacher et al., annotated Fig. 3 above) of the working medium through-flow hole (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 1, element 21) comprises at least one first horizontal sidewall (Kalbacher et al., annotated in Fig. 3 above); and
the sealing structure (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, elements 5 and 6) further comprises a sealing ring (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 5) disposed between the at least one first horizontal sidewall and the plugging part (Kalbacher et al., annotated in Fig. 3 above), and the sealing ring seals a gap between the at least one first horizontal sidewall at the sealing ring and the plugging part (Kalbacher et al., paragraph [0030]).
Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the sealing ring of Kalbacher et al. to the sealing structure of Saito et al. so that the plugging part seals the gap between the hose of Fukunaga and the hole wall of the working medium through-flow hole as taught by Kalbacher et al. This modification would be beneficial as the addition of the sealing ring would both more firmly secure the plugging part to the hole wall and ensure the system was sealed against fluid and gas exchange outside of the hose.
[Claim 9] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. teaches: The electronic device according to claim 4. Neither Fukunaga nor Saito et al. teach that the plug further comprises a guide part. Kalbacher et al. teaches a housing (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 1) with a working medium through-flow hole (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 1, element 21) so that a coolant can enter the housing (Kalbacher et al., paragraph [0017]) through a plug (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 4) that inserts into the working medium through-flow hole. This plug further comprises a guide part (Kalbacher et al., annotated in Fig. 3) disposed coaxially with a plugging part (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 1 and 3, element 4a), one end that is of the plugging part and that faces the inner cavity of the housing is fixedly connected to one end of the guide part (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 1 and 3, the guide part annotated in Fig. 3 below is integrally formed with the plugging part 4a, and is located closer to the inner cavity of the housing 1 than plugging part 4a is), and the other end of the guide part extends into the housing through the working medium through-flow hole (Kalbacher et al., annotated Fig. 3, the guide part extends from the plugging part 4a into the working medium through-flow hole 21 toward the inner cavity of the housing 1).
Kalbacher et al. is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of sealing plugs around cooling system inputs. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the mounting bracket and housing of Fukunaga so that the hose was connected to a sealing structure as taught by Saito et al. that included a guide part connected to the plugging part as taught by Kalbacher et al. With this addition, the hose of Fukunaga would penetrate through and fixedly connect to the guide part (as it would be attached to the plugging part which Saito et al. teaches is fixed to the hose). Further, based on the materials of the hose and plugging part discussed in the claim 1 103 rejection above, a joint between the hose and the guide part would be is sealed. This modification would be advantageous as it would aid in the attachment of the sealing structure to the housing by ensuring proper alignment of the plug with the working medium through-flow hole.
[Claim 10] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. teaches the electronic device according to claim 2, but neither teaches that the sealing structure comprises a compression flange. Kalbacher et al. teaches a housing (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 1) with a working medium through-flow hole (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 1, element 21) so that a coolant can enter the housing (Kalbacher et al., paragraph [0017]) through a sealing structure (Kalbacher et al., Abstract) with a plug (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 4) that inserts into the working medium through-flow hole. The sealing structure further comprises a compression flange (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 12) fixedly connected to an outer wall of the housing (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 1) by using a fastener (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 13), wherein the compression flange abuts against an end face of one end that is of the plug and that faces away from an inner cavity of the housing (Kalbacher et al. Fig, 3, element 12 presses against element 6 and the top of element 11, which is opposite the inner cavity inside the housing 1), to compress and fasten the plug on the housing (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 12 holds the plug in place by nature of screwing into housing 1).
Kalbacher et al. is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of sealing plugs around cooling system inputs. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the mounting bracket and housing of Fukunaga so that the hose was connected to a sealing structure with a plug as taught by Saito et al. and a compression flange as taught by Kalbacher et al. This modification would be advantageous as it would prevent the sealing structure from failing due to movement of the plugging part.
Claims 19 and 20 are nearly identical to claims 5 and 6. Thus, for the sake of brevity, the Examiner referenced these previous 103 rejections when relevant.
[Claim 19] Fukunaga, in view of Saito et al. teaches the server according to claim 18, but neither teaches a step structure. Kalbacher et al. teaches a cooling system entering a housing (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 1) through a working medium through-flow hole (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 21) that has a hole wall that comprises a step structure (Kalbacher et al., annotated Fig. 3 above; Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. and Kalbacher et al., as described and modified in the claim 5 103 rejection above).
[Claim 20] Fukunaga, in view of Saito et al. and Kalbacher et al. teaches the server according to claim 19. Neither Fukunaga nor Saito et al. teaches a step structure. Kalbacher et al. teaches a cooling system entering a housing (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 1) through a working medium through-flow hole (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 21) with a step structure comprising at least one first vertical end face (Kalbacher et al., annotated Fig. 3 above; Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. and Kalbacher et al., described and modified in the claim 5 103 rejection above) and a sealing structure (Kalbacher et al., Abstract) comprising a sealing gasket (Kalbacher et al., Fig. 3, element 6; Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. and Kalbacher et al., as described and modified in the claim 6 103 rejection above).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukunaga (US 10,405,458 B2) in view of Saito et al. (US 10,985,510 B2), as applied to claim 11, above, and further in view of Huang et al. (US 11,473,486 B2). For clarity, bold text indicates claim language.
[Claim 12] Fukunaga in view of Saito et al. teaches: The electronic device according to claim 11. Neither Fukunaga nor Saito et al. teaches that the floating structure further comprises an elastic adjustment sleeve. Huang et al. teaches “a fluid connector assembly [that] includes a housing … and a floating component” (Huang et al., Abstract). The floating structure (Huang et al., Fig. 4 and 5, element 140) comprises an elastic adjustment sleeve (Huang et al., Fig. 4 and 5, element 150) disposed between a sidewall of a mounting part (Huang et al., Fig. 5, element 162) and a wall of a mounting groove (Huang et al., Fig. 4 and 5, the cavity within element 140), wherein the mounting part is mounted in the mounting groove through the elastic adjustment sleeve (Huang et al., Fig. 4, element 150 holds mounting part 162 in place), and the elastic adjustment sleeve is configured to be deformed in response to an external force (Huang et al., col. 4, lines 6-14), so that a position of a second end changes (Huang et al., Fig. 4 and 5, element 162B)
Huang et al. is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of floating structures for a fluid connector. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the elastic adjustment sleeve of Huang et al. to the floating structure of Fukunaga. This addition would ensure that the first connector would return to an initial position after decoupling with a second connector, as well as soften the force of any impact that might otherwise have damaged the first connector.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 13, and 17 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. For clarity, bold text indicates claim language.
[Claims 3 and 17] The prior art made of record does not teach that the plug and hose are of an integrated structure and that one end of the hose is located in the housing while the other end of the hose is located outside the housing.
[Claim 13] Although Fukunaga teaches a guide post, sliding hole, and elastic reset member, none of the prior art made of record teaches a mounting seat with a mounting groove and guide posts that fixedly connect to the mounting bracket.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tan et al. (US 11,452,237 B2) teaches a module to connect cooling system lines to a computing system including a biasing member
Motohashi et al. (US 10,361,503 B2) teaches a connector with an elastic seal and compression flange.
Bolat (US 11,480,282 B2) teaches a coupling device with a stepped connection that splits one fluid chamber into several.
Briard (FR 2927398 A1) teaches a working medium through-flow hole with a stepped structure.
Weiss et al. (EP 2875274 B1) teaches a connector with a stepped structure where the plug is covered in an elastic material.
Jia et al. (US 2024/0324146 A1) teaches a floating structure with guide posts fixedly connected to the mounting bracket.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Emily M Culley whose telephone number is 571-270-0560. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00 am to 5:00 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/EMC/Examiner,
Art Unit 3632
/TERRELL L MCKINNON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632
