Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/201,554

Terminal Body, Terminal, and Connector

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
May 24, 2023
Examiner
MANGOT, GREGORY LAWRENCE
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Tyco Electronics (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
28 granted / 45 resolved
-5.8% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
72
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
48.6%
+8.6% vs TC avg
§102
30.7%
-9.3% vs TC avg
§112
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 45 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission has been entered. 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. Claims 18-22 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. Claim 18 recites “the front side edge,” which lacks antecedent basis. It will be interpreted as, “a front side edge.” Claims 19-22 inherit the deficiencies of the claims from which they depend. 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. Claims 18, 19, and 21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nottrott (US 6068526) and Bosch (DE 102017220778 A1). Regarding claim 18: Nottrott (Marked versions of figure 3 below) teaches a terminal, comprising: a terminal body including: a crimping part (i.e. having W and B) adapted to be crimped onto a cable; a mating part (i.e. M) adapted to mate with a mating terminal; and a connecting part (i.e. C) connected between the crimping part and the mating part, the crimping part includes a base (i.e. B) connected to the connecting part and a pair of side wings (i.e. W) extending from a pair of sides of the base beyond the connecting part, a stress relief notch (i.e. N) is formed at a corner between each of the side wings and one of the connecting side parts of the connecting part, the pair of connecting side parts are respectively connected to both sides of a front end of the base, each connecting side part has an upper side edge (i.e. U) adjacent to the front side edge (i.e. F) of one of the side wings, each stress relief notch has a first side edge (i.e. S1) connected to the upper side edge of one connecting side part, each first side edge extends diagonally downwards from each upper side edge of the connecting side part towards the base of the crimping part, the upper side edge of each connecting side part is perpendicular to the front side edge of one of the side wings; but does not specifically teach, a pair of contacts respectively installed on a pair of inner faces of a pair of installation plates of the terminal body, the pair of inner faces face each other and the pair of contacts electrically contact the mating terminal inserted between the pair of contacts. However, Bosch (Figures 4a, 4b) teaches a pair of contacts (i.e. 21) respectively installed on a pair of inner faces of a pair of installation plates (i.e. inner faces of plates of 2) of the terminal body, the pair of inner faces face each other and the pair of contacts electrically contact the mating terminal inserted between the pair of contacts. PNG media_image1.png 130 212 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 243 556 media_image2.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the terminal taught by Nottrott to have a pair of contacts installed on installation plates as taught by Bosch so as to secure the terminal in the desired manner. Regarding claim 19: Nottrott and Bosch teach the terminal according to claim 18, further comprising a locking member (i.e. latch behind 21a) sleeved on a front end of the pair of installation plates of the terminal body. Regarding claim 21: Nottrott and Bosch teach the terminal according to claim 18, wherein each contact has a plurality of elastic arms (i.e. as in Bosch figure 5). Claim 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nottrott, Bosch, and Gao (US 2016/0322720 A1). Regarding claim 22: Nottrott and Bosch teach the terminal according to claim 18, but do not specifically teach wherein each contact has a riveting hole. However, Gao (Figure 4) teaches wherein each contact has a riveting hole (i.e. 231). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to secure the contacts taught by Nottrott and Bosch with the riveting holes taught by Gao as a design choice. Claim 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant Admitted Prior Art (“AAPA”, background of instant specification), Nottrott, and Bosch. Regarding claim 20: AAPA teaches a connector (i.e. high-voltage connector of paragraph [0003]), comprising: a housing (i.e. housing of paragraph [0003]) formed with a terminal slot (i.e. “terminals installed in the housing” of paragraph [0003]); but does not specifically teach the terminal according to claim 18 inserted into the terminal slot of the housing. however, Nottrott and Bosch teach the terminal according to claim 18, Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the terminal taught by Nottrott and Bosch with the connector taught by AAPA so as to use the terminal for the desired application. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-17 and 23-24 allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Applicant’s arguments are persuasive and the prior art of record does not teach each stress relief notch extends past a front side edge of one side wing, each first side edge extends diagonally downwards from each upper side edge, and the upper side edge is perpendicular to the front side edge of one of the side wings, alone or in obvious combination with the remainder of the claim. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments regarding claims 18-22 have been fully considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection does not rely on Grote, Bosch, or Gao for teaching the perpendicular arrangement argued against. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gregory Mangot whose telephone number is 703-756-5737. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm ET. 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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at 571-272-3560. 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. /GREGORY L MANGOT/Examiner, Art Unit 2834 /CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 24, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Oct 30, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 08, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jan 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 09, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597719
Connection Arrangement for Fastening an Electrical Contact Element to an Electrical Conductor
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586943
CONTACT ELEMENT WHICH CAN BE PRODUCED WITHOUT BURRS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580339
SPRING LOADED ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12567691
CONNECTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12562520
CONNECTOR ASSEMBLY WITH TERMINAL POSITION ASSURANCE AND BLOCKING FEATURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
62%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+19.5%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 45 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