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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s remarks assert that “claims 14-25 are pending,” and applicant’s amended claim set filed 10/09/2025 does not include claim 26. Claim 26 was presented as a new claim filed 06/08/2023 and has not been explicitly canceled. As such, examiner believes the claim is still pending and the new grounds of rejection presented in this action have been applied to previously presented claim 26.
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 14, 18, 23, and 24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Applicant Admitted Prior Art (“AAPA”).
Regarding claim 14: AAPA (Figures 1A and Background of the Specification) teaches a high-current plug-in connector configured as a built-in plug-in connector and suitable for use in a battery management system, comprising:
a plug-in connector housing (i.e. 1), the plug-in connector housing having
a mounting flange (i.e. 11) for attaching the plug-in connector housing on a plug-in side to a housing wall,
a contact chamber (i.e. 12) configured to receive screw contacts and crimp contacts, only one of which is mounted at a time (i.e. screw type mounted in figure 1A), and
an anti-rotation device (i.e. 123); and
an electrical contact (i.e. 2) arranged in the contact chamber, the electrical contact being either
a crimp contact that is inserted in the plug-in connector housing and has
a plug-in axis,
a plug-in section, and
a cable connection section for crimping a conductor of a cable thereto, or
a screw contact (i.e. 2) that is inserted into the plug-in connector housing and has
a plug-in axis (i.e. along 2),
a plug-in section (i.e. 21),
a retaining portion (i.e. 23), and
a cable connection (i.e. 22) section for securing a conductor of a cable thereto by screwing,
wherein the high-current plug-in connector with its cable connection section can be connected to the battery management system (i.e. as in paragraph [0003] lines 1-2) via a high-current connection cable (i.e. the connector and battery management system are inherently connectable via a high-current connection cable),
wherein the crimp contact is retained in such a manner as to be able to rotate about its plug-in axis in the plug-in connector housing, and
wherein the retaining portion of the screw contact engages the anti-rotation device and thereby prevents the screw contact from rotating about its plug-in axis (i.e. engaged as in figure 1A).
Regarding claim 18: AAPA teaches the high-current plug-in connector as claimed in claim 14, wherein the plug-in connector housing has at least one latching arm (i.e. 14) for latching onto a latching collar of the crimp contact (i.e. as 14 is for), and wherein the at least one latching arm can be removed by a dismantling tool (i.e. as 14 can be removed by) for dismantling the crimp contact from the latching collar.
Regarding claim 23: AAPA teaches a battery system, comprising:
multiple rechargeable batteries (i.e. “multiple rechargeable batteries” of paragraph [0003]) and multiple patch cables (i.e. “at least one patch cable” of paragraph [0003]) via which the batteries are connected to one another in an electrically conductive manner in parallel and/or in series (i.e. “parallel and/or in series” as in paragraph [0004]); and
a battery management system (i.e. “battery management system” of paragraph [0003]) that is equipped with at least one high-current plug-in connector as claimed in claim 14 (i.e. as discussed above and as “required in order to connect a battery management system…to a configurable pack” as described in paragraph [0003]),
wherein the batteries are connected via the at least one high-current plug-in connector to the battery management system and in each case at least one of the patch cables (i.e. as described in paragraphs [0003] and [0004]).
Regarding claim 24: AAPA teaches the battery system as claimed in claim 23, wherein the batteries are also equipped with the high-current plug-in connector according to claim 14 (i.e. as discussed above, claim 23 requires, “the batteries are connected via the at least one high-current plug-in connector.”).
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 15-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA in view of Griepenstroh (US 2015/0318637 A1).
Regarding claim 15: AAPA teaches the high-current plug-in connector as claimed in claim 14, but does not specifically teach
wherein the crimp contact does not co-operate with the anti-rotation device.
However, Griepenstroh (Figure 2) teaches a crimp contact (i.e. 3),
which, when placed in AAPA’s connector housing, would not co-operate with the anti-rotation device.
Because the terminal taught by Griepenstroh is inherently compatible with the connector taught by AAPA, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Griepenstroh’s terminal with AAPA’s connector so as to not purchase a different connector to maintain compatibility with both terminal types.
Because the connector taught by AAPA can inherently accommodate screw or crimp contacts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Griepenstroh’s terminal with AAPA’s connector so as to use the proper terminal for the given application.
Regarding claim 16: AAPA and Griepenstroh teach the high-current plug-in connector as claimed in claim 15, wherein the anti-rotation device comprises at least one internal straight shaping or at least one connecting piece (i.e. straight shaping of AAPA 123).
Regarding claim 17: AAPA and Griepenstroh teach the high-current plug-in connector as claimed in claim 15, Griepenstroh (Figure 2) further teaches wherein the crimp contact comprises a cylindrical retaining portion (i.e. held by 4 in figure 2) without flattenings or indentations between its plug-in section (i.e. front of 3) and its cable connection section (i.e. 3a).
Claim 19-21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA and Yamada (EP 2369689 B1).
Regarding claim 19: AAPA teaches the high-current plug-in connector as claimed in claim 14, but does not teach further comprising a separate cable connection housing, which has a flange for attaching on a cable connection side to the housing wall.
However, Yamada (Figure 2) teaches a separate cable connection housing (i.e. housing of 50), which has a flange (i.e. 53) for attaching on a cable connection side to the housing wall (i.e. as in figure 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the connector taught by AAPA to have a separate cable connection housing having a flange for attaching to the housing wall in order to protect the terminal and wire while the connector is assembled.
Regarding claim 20: AAPA and Yamada teach the high-current plug-in connector as claimed in claim 19, Yamada further teaches wherein the cable connection housing comprises a cable gland (i.e. gland of 50) by which the crimp contact that is mounted in the plug-in connector housing can be fixed in a final position in the plug-in connector housing (i.e. as in figure 5).
Regarding claim 21: AAPA and Yamada teach the high-current plug-in connector as claimed in claim 20, Yamada teaches further comprising a rubber clamp (i.e. 18) for additionally fixing the crimp contact in the plug-in connector housing (i.e. as in figure 6).
Claims 25-26 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA, Yamada, and Behning (US 47773871).
Regarding claim 25: AAPA and Yamada teach a method for mounting the high-current plug-in connector as claimed in claim 20 to a housing wall, comprising:
suitably customizing the connection cable with regard to its length for a respective application (i.e. as in Yamada figure 5);
crimping the connection cable onto the crimp contact (i.e. as in Yamada figure 5);
inserting the crimp contact on a cable connection side into the plug-in connector housing and latching therein and screwing the plug-in connector housing the plug-in side at a wall opening to the housing wall (i.e. as in figure 5);
screwing the cable connection housing on the cable connection side at the wall opening to the housing wall and in so doing encompassing the connection cable (i.e. as in Yamada figure 5);
but do not specifically teach fixing the connection cable and the crimp contact that is fixedly crimped thereto in their final position by screwing a union nut to the cable connection housing.
However, Behning (Figure 1) teaches
fixing the connection cable (i.e. 6) and the crimp contact that is fixedly crimped thereto in their final position by screwing a union nut (i.e. 21) to the cable connection housing (i.e. via 19)
Regarding claim 26: AAPA, Yamada, and Behning teach the method as claimed in claim 25, wherein in method step D so as to additionally fix the crimp contact a rubber clamp (i.e. Yamada’s 18) is arranged between the crimp contact and the plug-in connector housing.
Claim 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA and Luzzi (US 4955823).
Regarding claim 22: AAPA teaches the high-current plug-in connector as claimed in claim 14, but does not specifically teach wherein the crimp contact is designed so as to transmit an electrical current of more than 300 A.
However, Luzzi teaches a crimp contact (i.e. 68) designed so as to transmit an electrical current of more than 300 A (i.e. 600 A as understood from abstract lines 1-2 and Col. 4 lines 30-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Luzzi’s crimp contact with AAPA’s high-current connector because Luzzi’s crimp contact can accommodate high-current applications.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are moot because Yamada is not relied on for any teaching challenged in applicant’s remarks.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment 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 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 addition 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