Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/114,105

Method for assembling an elastomer seal spring in a connector assembly

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Feb 24, 2023
Examiner
TUGBANG, ANTHONY D
Art Unit
2896
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
J S T Corporation
OA Round
4 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
816 granted / 1058 resolved
+9.1% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1098
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
50.2%
+10.2% vs TC avg
§102
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
§112
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1058 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION Response to Amendment The following is in reply to the applicant’s submission (e.g. amendment, remarks, etc.) filed on February 20, 2026. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim Objections The claim objections in the previous office action1 have been withdrawn in light of the amendment to Claim 10. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 10 through 14 and 16 are 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. In Claim 10, “the inner side wall” (line 9) lacks positive antecedent basis. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 Claims 10 through 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication 2009/0035976 to Matsunaga (hereinafter “Matsunaga”)2. Claim 10: Matsunaga discloses a method for assembling a seal spring (e.g. 18, Fig. 4) in a connector assembly (e.g. ¶ [0002]) , comprising: inserting the seal spring into an inner cavity of a housing (e.g. 10, Fig. 4); pushing the seal spring into the inner cavity of the housing (e.g. ¶ [0038]); thereafter, pushing the seal spring into the housing so as to position the seal spring against a tab (e.g. 25) within the inner cavity of the housing, the tab having an angled lead (e.g. annotated in partial view of Fig. 6) which makes contact with the seal spring when in use (e.g. Fig. 7, ¶ [0038]); PNG media_image1.png 345 567 media_image1.png Greyscale resting, in its entirety, at least the angled lead of the tab onto an angled portion of an inner side wall of the seal spring [annotated in partial view of Fig. 7) upon assembling the seal spring in the connector assembly (e.g. Fig. 8); PNG media_image2.png 462 567 media_image2.png Greyscale thereafter inserting a second outer housing (e.g. 30) into the inner cavity of the housing (e.g. Figs. 9 to 10); and, thereafter, providing a spring force (e.g. compression) to the tab (e.g. at 36, ¶ [0064]). Claim 11: Matsunaga discloses the method according to claim 10, wherein the method for assembling the seal spring in the connector assembly, the seal spring presses against a forward stop (e.g. 13) of the housing (e.g. 10) after the step of providing the spring force to the seal spring (e.g. Fig. 7). Claim 12: Matsunaga discloses the method according to claim 10, wherein the method for assembling the seal spring in the connector assembly, the seal spring contacts the second outer housing (e.g. at 37 of 30), the second outer housing (e.g. at 42) inserts into an inner aperture of the seal spring, after the step of providing the spring force to the seal spring (e.g. Fig. 10). Claim 13: Matsunaga discloses the method according to claim 10, wherein the seal spring seals against the inner cavity of the housing (e.g. ¶ [0049]). Claim 14: Matsunaga discloses the method according to claim 10, wherein the method for assembling the seal spring in the connector assembly, the seal spring contacts the second outer housing (e.g. at 37 of 30), the second outer housing (e.g. at 42) inserted into an inner aperture of the seal spring, after the step of providing the spring force to the seal spring, wherein the seal spring seals against the second outer housing (e.g. Fig. 10). Claim 16: Matsunaga discloses the method according to claim 10, wherein at least a side wall (e.g. 21), first and second faces (e.g. each 22), an inner aperture (e.g. not labeled, inside of 18), an outer sealing portion (e.g. 20), the side wall, and an inner sealing portion (e.g. inner surface of aperture of 18) form the seal spring that is, substantially, in its entirety, a contiguous and continuous single construction (e.g. Fig. 4). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed as part of the submission [pages 6 to 10] have been fully considered, but have not been deemed to be found as persuasive. In regards to the merits of Matsunaga, applicant asserts that Matsunaga cannot be applied to the claims for at least the following reasons. The first is that Matsunaga’s tab 25 is not that of an outer housing, but is a member or element that extends from an inner housing. Whether or not this is true, this recitation is not claimed. Nothing in Claim 10 recites that the tab has to be part of an outer housing. Claim 10 only recites that the tab be “within said inner cavity of said housing” (line 6), and Figures 4 and 7 of Matsunaga clearly show the tab 25 to be within an inner cavity of housing 10. Secondly, applicant urges that Matsunaga’s tab 25 sits onto an outer surface of the seal spring. The examiner disagrees. As previously illustrated in the partial view of Figure 7, an inner side wall of the seal spring is read as an inner diameter surface of the seal spring 18, which contacts an outer curved, or top surface, of tab 25, i.e. angled lead of tab. Third, applicant believes that the amended portion of Claim 10, e.g. “resting, in its entirety,…said connector assembly” (at lines 8-10) is now not met by Matsunaga. The examiner disagrees for all of the preceding reasons, as well as the annotated illustrations above of Figures 6 and 7 of Matsunaga. The applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to Claims 11 through 14 and 16, stand or fall together with Claim 10. It appears that further limitations in Claim 10 are needed, particularly with respect to the tab, in order for the claim to be distinguished over Matsunaga. Under the applicants remarks as to the significance of the applicant’s tabs [pages 7 to 8 of submission], perhaps some of these structural features of the tabs can be recited in Claim 10. Or perhaps more specific locations of the tabs relative to the housing, or portions of the housing, should be recited in Claim 10. The examiner invites applicants to a telephone interview to discuss such an amendment that would overcome Matsunaga. Conclusion Applicant's amendment filed as part of their submission has necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to A. DEXTER TUGBANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4570. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 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, JESSICA HAN can be reached at (571) 272-2078. 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. /A. DEXTER TUGBANG/Primary Examiner Art Unit 2896 1 Non-Final action, mailed on February 4, 2026. 2 Elements emphasized (in italics) have been annotated in a partial view of Matsunaga’s Figure 6.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 24, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Sep 26, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 13, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §112
Jan 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 23, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Feb 20, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597663
Method for Producing a High-Voltage Battery Unit and a High-Voltage Battery Unit
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597593
Manufacturing Method for Traceability of Battery Electrodes with Fiducial Markers
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597834
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING STATOR FOR ROTARY ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598707
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING MULTI-LAYER CIRCUIT BOARD INCLUDING EXTREME FINE VIA AND MULTI-LAYER CIRCUIT BOARD MANUFACTURED BY THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597558
SPIRAL CORE CURRENT TRANSFORMER FOR ENERGY HARVESTING APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.6%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1058 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