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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 16-27, 31-34 and 36-40 are pending.
Claims 1-15, 28-30 and 35 are canceled.
Claims 27 and 31-34 are withdrawn.
Claims 19-23 are currently amended.
Claims 16-18, 24-26 are previously presented.
Claims 36-40 are new.
Claims 16, 19-20, 23-26 and 36-37 are rejected herein.
Claims 17-18, 21-22, 24 and 36-40 are objected to herein.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Invention I (including in the reply filed on 01/28/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement among Inventions I-III, this election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 27 and 31-34 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A in the reply filed on 01/28/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that FIGS. 1-4 are not directed to different species. This is found persuasive. Accordingly, the election of species requirement (i.e., among Species A-D) in the Office Action dated 11/28/2025 is withdrawn.
Claims 16-26 and 36-40 are being examined herein.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: ELECTRICAL AND/OR ELECTRONIC COMPONENT INCLUDING FLEXIBLE BENT TERMINAL.
Claim Objections
Claim 24 is objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 24 recites the limitation “wherein the electrical and/or electronic component includes a terminal and/or support side to a carrier substrate” in lines 2-3. The foregoing limitation is grammatically incorrect and unclear. For examination purposes, the foregoing limitation shall be interpreted to mean that the electrical and/or electronic component includes a terminal and/or support side having some spatial relationship to a carrier substrate.
Claims 36 and 37 are objected to because of the following informalities: neither claim ends with a period. Appropriate correction is required. For examination purposes, the claims shall be read as if ending with a period.
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.
Claim 20 is 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.
The term “several” in claim 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “several” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Notably, because of the use of the term “several” in the claim, one of ordinary skill in the art could not determine how many times shorter the terminal leg is than the bending leg. Accordingly, for examination purposes, “a longitudinal extension of the terminal leg is several times shorter than a longitudinal extension of the bending leg” shall be read to mean that the terminal leg is shorter than the bending leg by some amount.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16, 19-20, 24 and 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishida (US 5240170 A).
Regarding claim 16, Nishida discloses (see generally, FIGS. 1-4 and 12, Abstract and column 6, lines 3-25):
An electrical and/or electronic component (2), comprising:
at least one electrical outside terminal contact configured as a terminal lug (11), attached at one side, for electrical contacting with a planar contacting partner (10), the terminal lug (11) including a connecting side (bottom side) including a planar connecting surface (bottom surface) for the electrical contacting;
wherein an exposed end of the terminal lug (11) includes a bending leg (11a), which is bent by a compensating angle (ϴ) out of a plane toward the connecting side (bottom side), the bending leg (11a) including the connecting surface (bottom surface), and the terminal lug (11) being configured in such a flexible manner that, when the planar contacting partner (10) makes site contact with a free end of the bending leg (11a) with a force applied from the connecting side (bottom side), a position orientation of the connecting surface (bottom surface) is adaptable at least counter to the compensating angle (ϴ) until a gap-free contact is made between the connecting surface (bottom surface) and the planar contacting partner (10).
Note, when the component (2) is pressed toward the partner (10), the partner makes site contact with a free end of the bending leg (11a) and a force is applied from the connecting side (bottom side), e.g., by the partner (10).
Regarding claim 19, Nishida discloses:
The electrical and/or electronic component (2) as recited in claim 16, wherein the terminal lug (11) includes a terminal leg (i.e., the portion of element 11 extending horizontally beyond the end of element 1 – herein after referenced as “TL”) which extends rectilinearly (horizontally) and which, with its one end, opens via a bending point into the bending leg (11a) and, at its other end, includes a one-sided attachment of the terminal lug (11) within the electrical and/or electronic component (2). See, e.g., FIG. 4.
Regarding claim 20, Nishida discloses:
The electrical and/or electronic component (2) as recited in claim 19, wherein a longitudinal extension of the terminal leg (TL) is several times shorter than a longitudinal extension of the bending leg (11a). See, e.g., FIG. 4.
Regarding claim 24, Nishida discloses:
The electrical and/or electronic component (2) as recited in claim 16, wherein the electrical and/or electronic component (2) includes a terminal and/or support side (see, e.g., the bottom side of element 1 – hereinafter referenced as “T/SS”) to a carrier substrate (3), the terminal lug (11) being situated spaced apart from the terminal and/or support side (T/SS) and, in a top view onto the terminal or support side (T/SS), projecting laterally (i.e., horizontally) therefrom, being attached thereto on one side within the electrical and/or electronic component (2), the bending leg (11a) pointing away from the terminal and/or support side (T/SS).
Regarding claim 36, Nishida discloses:
The electrical and/or electronic component (2) as recited in claim 16, wherein the connecting contact is a weld contact (see column 5, lines 31-49).
Regarding claim 37, Nishida discloses:
The electrical and/or electronic component (2) as recited in claim 16, wherein the connecting contact is a laser weld contact (see column 5, lines 31-49).
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 23 and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida in view of Otremba (US 20160365296 A1).
Regarding claim 23, Nishida as applied to claim 16 discloses the electrical and/or electronic component (2) as recited in claim 16.
Nishida does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrical and/or electronic component includes a housing, from which the terminal lug, which is attached at one side, protrudes.
However, in analogous art, Otremba discloses (see, e.g., FIG. 2B) an electrical and/or electronic component (200) including a housing (10), from which the terminal lug (12), which is attached at one side, protrudes.
It would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included in the electrical and/or electronic component (2) of Nishida a housing, from which the terminal lug, which is attached at one side, protrudes as taught by Otremba according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, to protect the electrical and/or electronic component.
Regarding claim 25, Nishida as applied to claim 16 discloses the electrical and/or electronic component (2) as recited in claim 16.
Nishida does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrical and/or electronic component is a power module.
However, in analogous art, Otremba discloses (see, e.g., FIG. 2B) an electrical and/or electronic component (200) being a power module (paragraph [0022]).
It would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the electrical and/or electronic component (2) of Nishida a power module as taught by Otremba according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, to provide for the mounting of a power device to the circuit board (3) of Nishida.
Regarding claim 26, Nishida as applied to claim 16 discloses the electrical and/or electronic component (2) as recited in claim 16.
Nishida does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrical and/or electronic component is a mold module.
However, in analogous art, Otremba discloses (see, e.g., FIG. 2B) an electrical and/or electronic component (200) being a mold module.
Note, as disclosed by Otremba, the device (200) includes an encapsulation material (10) that may be a mold compound. See, e.g., paragraph [0026]. Accordingly, an electrical and/or electronic component (200) is a mold module.
It would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the electrical and/or electronic component (2) of Nishida a mold module as taught by Otremba according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, to provide for the mounting of a device to the circuit board (3) of Nishida which is protected by a mold compound.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-18, 21-22 and 38-40 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.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art of record, alone or in combination, fails to disclose, along with the other claimed limitations and/or features, inter alia: “wherein the compensating angle has a value in a range of 0.5º to 5º,” in such a manner as to anticipate the claim or render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art of record, alone or in combination, fails to disclose, along with the other claimed limitations and/or features, inter alia: “wherein the compensating angle has a value in a range of 0.5º to 1.5º,” in such a manner as to anticipate the claim or render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 21, the prior art of record, alone or in combination, fails to disclose, along with the other claimed limitations and/or features, inter alia: “wherein a longitudinal extension of the terminal leg is 2 to 20 times shorter than a longitudinal extension of the bending leg,” in such a manner as to anticipate the claim or render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 22, the prior art of record, alone or in combination, fails to disclose, along with the other claimed limitations and/or features, inter alia: “wherein a longitudinal extension of the terminal leg is 5 to 10 times shorter than a longitudinal extension of the bending leg,” in such a manner as to anticipate the claim or render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 38, the prior art of record, alone or in combination, fails to disclose, along with the other claimed limitations and/or features, inter alia: “the terminal lug being configured for connection to a terminal point of the electronic circuit via a bridging of the contacting partner between the terminal lug and the terminal point, the contacting partner being a connecting clip,” in such a manner as to anticipate the claim or render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 39, the prior art of record, alone or in combination, fails to disclose, along with the other claimed limitations and/or features, inter alia: “the terminal lug being configured for connection to a terminal point of the electronic circuit via a bridging of the contacting partner between the terminal lug and the terminal point, the contacting partner being a connecting clip,” in such a manner as to anticipate the claim or render the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 40, the prior art of record, alone or in combination, fails to disclose, along with the other claimed limitations and/or features, inter alia: “the terminal lug being configured for connection to a terminal point of the electronic circuit via a bridging of the contacting partner between the terminal lug and the terminal point, the contacting partner being a connecting clip,” in such a manner as to anticipate the claim or render the claim obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN P CORNELY whose telephone number is (571)272-4172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:30 AM - 4:00 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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached at (571) 272-1945. 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.
JOHN P. CORNELY
Examiner
Art Unit 2812
/J.P.C./Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/DAVIENNE N MONBLEAU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812