Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/029,037

CONNECTOR

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Aug 11, 2023
Examiner
LUEBKE, RENEE S
Art Unit
2831
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Sumitomo Wiring Systems, LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
39%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
47%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 39% of cases
39%
Career Allow Rate
39 granted / 100 resolved
-29.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
139
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
38.6%
-1.4% vs TC avg
§102
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
§112
21.8%
-18.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 100 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
Notice of 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 A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed, providing informative value in classifying and searching. The following title is suggested: See MPEP § 606.01. WIRE CONNECTOR HAVING A THREE PART SEAL RETAINER Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed first and second insertion holes must be shown or the features cancelled from claim 2. See MPEP § 608.02(d) Although the specification identifies (42a, 42b, 52A, 52B) as insertion holes, they are not in fact “holes” by any stretch of the definition of such; which is understood as an opening through something hence bound by a defined area. Furthermore, the claimed introducing grooves (43a, 43b, 53A, 53B) are adjacent said holes where a “groove” by definition is bound by two sides as in a furrow or channel which is what is depicted in FIG. 4, which negates the existence of any “hole”. “Any structural detail that is of sufficient importance to be described should be shown in the drawing.” (Ex parte Good, 1911 C.D. 43, 164 O.G. 739 (Comm’r Pat. 1911). “The question is not whether one skilled in the art can decipher the invention, but whether the drawing is so clearly and artistically executed as to facilitate a ready understanding of the invention both at the time of examination and in searches afterward in which reference to the patent must be made.” Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in response to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. No new matter should be entered in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(e). If the changes are not accepted by the Examiner, the Applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. Claims 2-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without clarity on the “second introducing groove”, which is critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claims in a manner consistent with the disclosure. Paragraph [0038] provides antecedent basis for first introducing grooves 43a, 43b extending from the first insertion holes 42a, 42b, within the first retainer. Paragraph [0040] contradicts the precedent set in paragraph [0038] by citing “the second insertion hole 42b via the second introducing groove 43b”, also as part of the first retainer. Compounding this matter is the fact that Claim 2 ascribes the second insertion hole and second introducing groove as part of the second retainer. The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible such errors which hinder the overall clarity. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting all remaining errors and ambiguity in the specification such as those instances depicted above while taking great care in not introducing any new matter. For examination purposes, FIG. 4 will be used as guidance with respect to those instances of ambiguity. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 - § 103 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. 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 of this title, 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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. §103 as unpatentable over Okabe Toshiaki (JP 10 012 317) [IDS filed March 28 2023]. With respect to Claim 1; Okabe Toshiaki discloses a connector 1, comprising: a housing 2 including an accommodating portion [occupied by 3], a wire 4b penetrating through the accommodating portion [Fig. 7]; a sealing member 3 for sealing between an inner surface of the accommodating portion and an outer peripheral surface of the wire [Figs. 4, 6]; and a retainer 11 for retaining the sealing member 3 by being fixed to the housing 2, the retainer including a first retainer 12 and a second retainer 13 overlapping in a length direction of the wire with respect to the sealing member [Fig. 7]. With respect to Claim 2 as best understood; Okabe Toshiaki discloses the first retainer 12 includes a first insertion hole / groove 17a, 17b the wire 4b being inserted through the first insertion hole / groove; and the second retainer 13 includes a second insertion hole / groove 22, the wire 4b being inserted through the second insertion hole / groove, and extending in a direction different from that of the first hole / groove [Fig. 1]. With respect to Claim 3; Okabe Toshiaki discloses the housing 2 includes a first locking protrusion 6a, 6b and a second locking protrusion [forming 5a] on a peripheral surface, the first retainer 12 includes a first body portion 16a. 16b overlapping the sealing member 3 in the length direction of the wire 4b and a first mounting portion 18a-c for mounting the first body portion 12 on the housing 2 by being engaged with the first locking protrusion 6a, 6b, and the second retainer 13 includes a second body portion overlapping the first body portion in the length direction of the wire [Fig. 7] and a second mounting portion 21a, 21b for mounting the second body portion on the housing 2 by being engaged with the second locking protrusion [forming 5a]. With respect to Claim 4; Okabe Toshiaki discloses first 6a, 6b and second [forming 5a] locking protrusions are arranged to be shifted in a circumferential direction of the housing 2, and the first 18a-c and second 21a, 21b mounting portions are arranged to be shifted in the circumferential direction of the housing [Fig. 1]. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form or amended into the respective independent base claim including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding claim 5; allowability resides at least in part with the prior art not showing or fairly teaching a wire connector comprising a housing including a sealing member fixed to the housing by a retainer which includes first and second retainers which overlap in a length direction of the wire with both retainers having mounting portions which engage respective locking protrusions on the housing such that the second retainer includes a locking/covering portion covering the first mounting portion of the first retainer in conjunction with ALL the remaining limitations within claims 1, 3 and 5. Prior Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure: US 10,573,988 Mellott et al. discloses a wire connector having two analogous retainers (24), (32), (30). However the analogous “first retainer” (24) does not mount to the connector housing. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning communications from the examiner should be directed to Vanessa Girardi: Office phone 571.272.5924 Mon-Fri 9am-5pm est Vanessa.Girardi@USPTO.Gov 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. Authorization for Email Communication — In the event Applicant wishes to communicate with the Examiner via electronic mail, written authorization should be provided in Applicant’s next response. See MPEP § 502.03. The following is a sample authorization statement which may be used by Applicant: Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, we hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with any authorized representative concerning any subject matter of this application by electronic mail. We understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file. If attempts to reach the examiner are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor Renee S. Luebke can be reached at 571.272.2009. The central fax phone number for the organization 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 about filing in DOCX format. [AltContent: textbox (VANESSA GIRARDI )]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. /VANESSA GIRARDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2833
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 11, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Apr 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597538
INJECTED INTERNAL STRAIN RELIEF FOR ELECTRICAL CABLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597747
ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR AND ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584616
MOVABLE ELECTRICAL FIXTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586967
6-in-1 Universal Cable
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12567706
FAN ELECTRICAL CONNECTION STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
39%
Grant Probability
47%
With Interview (+7.7%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 100 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month