Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/986,908

ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR WITH A GROUNDING PIECE BETWEEN TERMINALS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 15, 2022
Examiner
KRATT, JUSTIN M
Art Unit
2831
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Advanced Connectek Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
557 granted / 639 resolved
+19.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
699
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
50.4%
+10.4% vs TC avg
§102
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
§112
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 639 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kao et al. (2016/0156136). With regard to claim 1, Kao teaches, as shown in figures 1-9 and taught in paragraph 4: “An electrical connector (shown in figure 1), comprising: a shell 40, 50, and 60 having an insertion space 100 and comprising an inner shell 42 and 52 and an outer shell 60, wherein the inner shell comprises two inner shell components 42 and 52, and another electrical connector (corresponding electrical connector described in paragraph 4) is adapted to be inserted into the insertion space 100 along an insertion axis (running from the lower-left to the upper right through the middle of 10 in figure 2); two insulating bodies (upper and lower halves of 10 in figure 3), respectively disposed on upper and lower external surfaces of the inner shell, sandwiching the inner shell in a vertical arrangement (as shown in figure 8); a plurality of terminals 20 arranged on the two insulating bodies along an alignment axis (running upper-left to lower-right in figure 3); and a grounding piece 30, sandwiched between the two inner shell components, wherein the grounding piece 30 includes a fixed portion 32, two first connecting portions (portions of 30 where 33 extends from in figure 3), two second connecting portions (portions of 30 opposite where 33 extends from in figure 3), two clamp arms 35, and two grounding legs 36, wherein the two first connecting portions respectively extend from the fixed portion 32 and extending directions of the two first connecting portions are opposite to each other, and the two second connecting portions respectively extend from the fixed portion 32 and extending directions of the two second connecting portions are opposite to each other, wherein the two clamp arms 35 respectively extend from the two first connecting portions towards the insertion space 100, the two grounding legs 36 respectively extend from the two second connecting portions, and an extending direction of each of the two clamp arms 35 is opposite to an extending direction of each of the two grounding legs 36”. With regard to claim 2, Kao teaches: “The electrical connector according to claim 1”, as shown above. Kao also teaches, as shown in figures 1-9 and taught in paragraph 36: “wherein along the alignment axis, the plurality of terminals 20 are located between the two clamp arms 35, and the two clamp arms 35 respectively have clamp heads (upper-left ends of 35 in figure 4) to clamp the another electrical connector”. With regard to claim 3, Kao teaches: “The electrical connector according to claim 1”, as shown above. Kao also teaches, as shown in figures 1-9: “wherein the fixed portion 32, the two first connecting portions, and the two clamp arms 35 are connected to one another to form a U-shaped structure, and an opening of the U-shaped structure faces the insertion space 100”. With regard to claim 4, Kao teaches: “The electrical connector according to claim 1”, as shown above. Kao also teaches, as shown in figures 1-9: “wherein the fixed portion 32, the two second connecting portions, and the two grounding legs 36 are connected to one another to form an inverted U-shaped structure, and an opening of the inverted U-shaped structure faces away from the insertion space 100”. 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. Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kao et al. (2016/0156136) in view of Kao et al. ‘9348 (2016/0149348). With regard to claim 19, Kao teaches, as shown in figures 1-9 and taught in paragraph 4: “An electrical connector (shown in figure 1), comprising: a shell 60 having an insertion space 100 and comprising an insulative housing 10 and a metallic shell 60, wherein another electrical connector (corresponding electrical connector described in paragraph 4) is adapted to be inserted into the insertion space 100 along an insertion axis (running from the lower-left to the upper right through the middle of 10 in figure 2); a plurality of terminals 20 arranged on the insulative housing 10 along an alignment axis (running upper-left to lower-right in figure 3); and a grounding piece 30 located inside the insulative housing 10, wherein the grounding piece 30 includes a fixed portion 32, two first connecting portions (portions of 30 where 33 extend from in figure 3), two second connecting portions (portions of 30 opposite where 33 extends from in figure 3), two clamp arms 35, and two grounding legs 36, wherein the two first connecting portions respectively extend from the fixed portion 32 and extending directions of the two first connecting portions are opposite to each other, and the two second connecting portions respectively extend from the fixed portion 32 and extending directions of the two second connecting portions are opposite to each other, wherein the two clamp arms 35 respectively extend from the two first connecting portions towards the insertion space 100, the two grounding legs 36 respectively extend from the two second connecting portions, and an extending direction of each of the two clamp arms 35 is opposite to an extending direction of each of the two grounding legs 36”. Kao does not teach: “wherein a portion of the terminals located between the metallic shell and the insulative housing extend along an exterior upper surface of the insulative housing and are inserted into the insulative housing through upper openings of the insulative housing, wherein another portion of the terminals located between the metallic shell and the insulative housing extend along an exterior lower surface of the insulative housing and are inserted into the insulative housing through lower openings of the insulative housing”. In the same field of endeavor before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, Kao ‘9348 teaches, as shown in figures 3-8: “wherein a portion (portion of the terminals 5 exposed to 4 in figure 5) of the terminals 5 and 8 located between the metallic shell 1 and the insulative housing D extend along an exterior upper surface of the insulative housing D and are inserted into the insulative housing D through upper openings (where 5 are inserted in to D in figure 5) of the insulative housing D, wherein another portion (portion of the terminals 8 exposed to 7 in figure 5) of the terminals 8 located between the metallic shell 1 and the insulative housing D extend along an exterior lower surface of the insulative housing D and are inserted into the insulative housing D through lower openings (where 8 are inserted in to D in figure 5) of the insulative housing D”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the features of Kao ‘9348 with the invention of Kao in order to be able to ground the shielding members to reduce electromagnetic interference (Kao ‘9348, paragraph 43). With regard to claim 20, Kao as modified by Kao ‘9348 teaches: “The electrical connector according to claim 19”, as shown above. Kao also teaches, as shown in figures 1-9: “wherein the fixed portion 32, the two first connecting portions, and the two clamp arms 35 are connected to one another to form a U-shaped structure, and an opening of the U-shaped structure faces the insertion space 100, and wherein the fixed portion 32, the two second connecting portions, and the two grounding legs 36 are connected to one another to form an inverted U-shaped structure, and an opening of the inverted U-shaped structure faces away from the insertion space 100”. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11-18 are allowed. Claims 5-10 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. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 1/20/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With regard to claim 1, the Applicant argues that the primary reference Kao does not teach the “two insulating bodies, respectively disposed on upper and lower external surfaces of the inner shell, sandwiching the inner shell in a vertical arrangement”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees, since figure 8 shows two surfaces of the inner shell sandwiched by the cited insulating bodies. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN M KRATT whose telephone number is (571)270-0277. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm. 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 A 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. /JUSTIN M KRATT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 15, 2022
Application Filed
May 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Aug 20, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 20, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603452
CABLE CONNECTOR WITH IMPROVED SIGNAL INTEGRITY AND CONNECTOR ASSEMBLY HAVING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603464
ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR UNIT USING ELECTROMAGNETIC SHIELD MEMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603447
BOARD-TO-BOARD CONNECTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597727
ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR WITH DEVICE-SIDE TERMINAL PORTION CONNECTED TO CONNECTOR-SIDE TERMINAL PORTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588714
ELECTRONIC AEROSOL PROVISION SYSTEM WITH MOVABLE ELECTRICAL CONNECTION PORT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+5.3%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 639 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month