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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cornic et al. (US PGPub 20110217853)
As per claim 1:
Cornic et al. discloses in Fig. 1:
A conversion circuit comprising:
a coaxial connector including a core wire (being a coaxial connector for coaxial cable [0005], including a central core, [0034]); and
a substrate (printed circuit 10, comprising a substrate, [0005]) including a surrounding conductor (bump contact 15, part of a conductive tract [0003]), a signal conductor (rectilinear part 14, [0005], part of a conductive tract [0003]), and a ground conductor (ground plane 18, [0003]), the surrounding conductor surrounding at least a part of the core wire and being electrically connected to the core wire ([0005]), the signal conductor being electrically connected to the surrounding conductor, the ground conductor being located on at least one of opposite sides of the signal conductor ([0005]), wherein at least a part of the surrounding conductor and at least a part of the ground conductor are opposed to one another (as seen in Fig. 1b).
As per claim 2:
Cornic et al. discloses in Fig. 1:
a structure (body 16 of coaxial connector 11, or vias 19) defining a through-hole forming a coaxial structure with the core wire (both coaxial connector 11 and vias 19 are arranged around the core of the coaxial connector 16, thus forming a coaxial structure with the core).
As per claim 3:
Cornic et al. discloses in Fig. 1:
a width (distance d) of a gap between the signal conductor and the ground conductor and a width (distance d) of a gap between the surrounding conductor and the ground conductor are substantially equal ([0006]).
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.
Claim(s) 2 (in an alternative interpretation) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cornic et al. (US PGPub 20110217853) in view of Laighton et al. (US PGPub 20170162958)
As per claim 2:
Cornic et al. (in an alternative interpretation) does not disclose:
a structure defining a through-hole forming a coaxial structure with the core wire.
Laighton et al. discloses in Figs. 1-3 & 6A-D:
A coaxial connector (connector receptacle 10) including a core wire (pin 16 & conductive via 80), wherein the connector comprises a structure defining a through-hole (hole 24 with plating of conductive layer 26) forming a coaxial structure with the core wire (with conductive shell 14 and vias 40a).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the coaxial connector of Cornic et al. using the coaxial structure of Laighton et al. as an art-recognized alternative/equivalent specific coaxial connector for the generic coaxial connector of Cornic et al., able to provide the same function.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL S OUTTEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7123. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at (571) 272-1988. 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.
/Samuel S Outten/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2843
