Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/305,352

TRANSITION COUPLING FOR TERMINATING CONNECTOR AND LIQUIDTIGHT CONDUIT FITTING

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 23, 2023
Examiner
GUSHI, ROSS N
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Service Wire Company
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
1227 granted / 1463 resolved
+15.9% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+2.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1497
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§102
51.3%
+11.3% vs TC avg
§112
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1463 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 filed on 2/22/26 has been entered. 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 following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Per claim 1: “the collet sleeve, when the male metal body is tightened, compresses and secures and the metallic copper tape shield to the exterior metal body.” See figure 3, showing that the copper tape 20 abuts collet sleeve 212 but does not reach the exterior male body and does not extend into the interior of collet sleeve 212. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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. Correction is required in response to this Office action and corrections may not be held in abeyance. Applicant is required to submit acceptable corrected drawings within the time period set in the Office action. See 37 CFR 1.185(a). Failure to take corrective action within the set (or extended) period will result in ABANDONMENT of the application. Claim Rejections - and 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1, 8, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morrison et al. US 7309835 (“Morrison”). Regarding claim 1, Morrison discloses a cable and termination system comprising: a cable comprising a cable core (1, 2, 3) and a metallic copper tape shield 11 surrounding the cable core; a conduit (armor 12, jacket 13) at least partially surrounding the cable; and a termination connector comprising an exterior metal connector body 21A, a compression nut (“standard connector” 20A, col. 3, lines 15-20, see figure 3) threadably engaged with the exterior metal body, and a male metal body 21C coupled with a collet sleeve 21B and threadably engaged with the exterior metal body 21A, wherein the compression nut, when tightened, secures the conduit to the exterior metal body (“when connected as hereinafter described, the rubber portion of the grounding seal 20B of the first connector will be positioned to cover the jacket 13 of the cable core, while the tines 20A grasp the exposed interlocked armor 12,” col. 4, lines 5-15, “tines 20A” presumably meaning tines 20C), and the collet sleeve 21B, when the male metal body is tightened, compresses and secures and the metallic copper tape shield to the exterior metal connector body (“Next, the male metal body/collet 21B, C is threaded onto the exterior metal body 21A, so that the collet 21B compresses on the copper tape shield 11, but not on the armor 12.” col. 4, lines 5-15). To the extent that reference to “tines 20A” is ambiguous, it would have been obvious that the passage refers to tines 20C grasping the armor 12 when the nut 20A compresses seal 20B. Such operation of the Morrison device would have been obvious given the figures. Regarding claim 8, to the extent that Morrison does not explicitly state that the jacket/conduit 13, made of polyvinylchloride or polyolefin (col. 3, lines 1-10), is "liquidtight," the examiner takes Official notice that cable jackets/conduits such as at Morrison 13 were known to be “liquidtight,” i.e., resistant to or impervious to liquids. Morrison notes that the material is moisture resistant (col. 3, lines 1-10). It would have been obvious to construct the jacket/conduit 13 to be “liquidtight” as was known in the art to prevent unwanted moisture incursion. Per claim 17 the compression nut comprises a partially threaded interior (see figure 3). Per claim 19, the compression nut engages the exterior metal body via threading that is inverse of the threading between the male metal body and the exterior metal body (col. 3, lines 20-30). Per claim 20, the cable comprises three ground conductors 2. Per claim 21, the compression nut engages the exterior metal body via threading that is the inverse of the threading by which the male metal body engages the exterior metal body (col. 3, lines 20-30). Per claim 22, the cable comprises an MC cable (col. 1, lines 55-60). Per claim 23, the MC cable further comprises a layer of binder tape 10 applied over the cable core. Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morrison in view of Chiu. Morrison does not disclose that the conduit is separate from the cable. Chiu discloses a cable 90 and a separate conduit 91 that extends into compression nut 30 and the compression member 20, which are analogous to Morrison nut 20A and exterior metal body 21A. It would have been obvious to provide a separate conduit around the Morrison cable, up to the point where the cable jacket is removed, in the interior of rubber ground seal 20B, and not extending to metal tines 20C. The reason would have been to provide protection from environmental effects such as moisture or chemicals on the cable portions exterior of the devices to which the cable is attached. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 18 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROSS GUSHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2005. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 8:30 - 5:00. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher Koehler can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ROSS N GUSHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 23, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 12, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 22, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603456
CONNECTOR AND CONNECTOR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597733
Shield Wire Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597737
ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR AND CONNECTOR SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597731
ELECTRICAL CONNECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592507
HIGH FREQUENCY RECEPTACLE FOR CABLE TV PIN CONNECTOR
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
84%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+2.5%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1463 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