DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9/3/26 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Regarding the amendment dated 9/23/26, amended claims 1, 5, and 25-28 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons.
Claims 1, 5, 25, 26, and 27 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 has been amended (9/23/26) to claim the species of invention (apparently shown in figures 11a and 11b) wherein:
“a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body having a width in a direction orthogonal to the first direction that is less than or equal to a width of a proximal end of the joint portion defined adjacent the main body . . .
“the joint portion is asymmetric about a center line of the joint portion set parallel
with the plugging direction of the contact, wherein the first portion of the contour and the
second portion of the contour are arranged on opposite sides of the center line of the joint
portion;
“an opening closed about its perimeter is formed through the joint portion, the first
portion of the contour defined within the opening.
Claim 1 is apparently now directed to the invention shown in figures 11a and 11b.
Original claim 6, now cancelled, claimed the species of invention wherein:
“a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body having a width in a direction orthogonal to the plugging direction that is greater than a width of a proximal end of the joint portion defined adjacent the main body . . . .”
Claim 6 was apparently directed to the species of figures 4.
Original claims 7 and 8 claimed:
7. The contact according to claim 1, wherein a notch is formed in the joint portion, the first portion of the contour defined by the notch.
8. The contact according to claim 7, wherein the notch is formed into a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body.
Claim 7 was generic to multiple species. Claim 8 was directed to the species of figure 10. Claim 8, directed to the species of figure 10 was examined on the merits in the Office action dated 9/12/25.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 1, 5, 25, 26, and 27 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
Regarding claim 28, claim 28 is directed to a connector assembly, including a contact arranged in the housing, including that:
“a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body having a width in a direction orthogonal to the first direction that is less than or equal to a width of a proximal end of the joint portion defined adjacent the main body, wherein the joint portion is asymmetric about a center line of the joint portion set parallel with the plugging direction of the contact, wherein the first portion of the contour and the second portion of the contour are arranged on opposite sides of the center line of the joint portion, and an opening closed about its perimeter is formed through the joint portion, the first portion of the contour defined within the opening.
Claim 1 is apparently now directed to the invention shown in figures 11a and 11b.
Original claim 6, now cancelled, claimed the species of invention wherein:
“a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body having a width in a direction orthogonal to the plugging direction that is greater than a width of a proximal end of the joint portion defined adjacent the main body . . . .”
Original claims 7 and 8 claimed:
7. The contact according to claim 1, wherein a notch is formed in the joint portion, the first portion of the contour defined by the notch.
8. The contact according to claim 7, wherein the notch is formed into a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body.
Claim 8 was directed to the species of figure 10. Claim 8, directed to the species of figure 10 was examined on the merits in the Office action dated 9/12/25.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 28 is withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the restriction have been considered. Regarding the restriction by original presentation of claims 1 and 28, the examiner does not understand applicant’s arguments. Applicant argues that because of original dependent claim 7, “both species were claimed.” Original claim 7 (7. The contact according to claim 1, wherein a notch is formed in the joint portion, the first portion of the contour defined by the notch.) is generic to multiple species. Original claim 8 (8. The contact according to claim 7, wherein the notch is formed into a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body.) is directed the species of figure 10. Applicant received an action on the merits for claims 7 and 8, directed to the species of figure 10. Now claim 1 and claim 28 are directed to the species of figures 11A/B. This is properly restricted for being directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph 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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claims 15, 24, 29, 31, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 15, the invention as claimed, including that:
“a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body having a width in a
direction orthogonal to a first direction of the contact that is less than or equal to a width of a proximal end of the joint portion defined adjacent the main body”
was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The original disclosure does not disclose the claimed device wherein the distal end is equal to a width of the proximal end. See e.g. figure 10.
Regarding claim 24, the invention as claimed, including that:
“the notch is defined by an arcuate surface of the joint portion having a constant radius of curvature” was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The original disclosure does not disclose this limitation.
Regarding claim 29, the invention as claimed, including that:
“the width of the distal end is equal to the width of the proximal end”
was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The original disclosure does not disclose this limitation.
Regarding claim 31, the invention as claimed, including that:
“only the solder joins the joint portion to the solder pad” was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The original disclosure does not disclose this limitation. The specification does not disclose this limitation. The limitation is arguably shown in figures 8 and 9, which show a different species of terminal than the terminal claimed in the invention of 15. The disclosure does not disclose combining the solder/board arrangement of the species shown in figures 8 and 9 with the species of invention claimed in claim 15.
Regarding claim 32, the invention as claimed, including that:
“the joint portion is spaced apart from the solder pad when the joint portion is joined to the solder pad via the solder” was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The original disclosure does not disclose this limitation. The specification does not disclose this limitation. The limitation is arguably shown in figures 8 and 9, which show a different species of terminal than the terminal claimed in the invention of 15. The disclosure does not disclose combining the solder/board arrangement of the species shown in figures 8 and 9 with the species of invention claimed in claim 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 15, 16, 17, 19, 30, 31, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vicich et al. US 7377795 (“Vicich”).
Regarding claim 15, Vicich discloses a connector assembly, comprising:
a contact housing 55;
a substrate 53 including a conductive solder pad 51; and
a contact 10 arranged in the contact housing, including:
a main body 11 adapted to be connected to a mating contact on a first end 13 thereof;
and a joint portion (at 12) protruding from a second end of the main body opposite the first end in a first direction (labeled D1 below),
the joint portion including a notch (labeled NT below) formed into a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body,
the joint portion adapted to be joined to the solder pad via solder 52, a portion of a contour of the joint portion defined by the notch at least partially facing in a second direction (labeled D2) opposite the first direction, the portion of the contour defined by the notch,
the solder surrounding the distal end of the joint portion and the notch (figure 5B),
the notch defining an opening in the joint portion open in the first direction,
a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body having a width (labeled WDE) in a direction orthogonal to a first direction of the contact that is less than a width (labeled WPE) of a proximal end of the joint portion defined adjacent the main body.
PNG
media_image1.png
1388
1086
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
804
952
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Per claim 16 the portion of the contour defines a normal vector extending outwardly from the contour and including a vector component (labeled VC above) extending in the second direction.
Per claim 17, the substrate is a printed circuit board.
Per claim 19, the solder opposes at least a portion of the joint portion in the second direction.
Per claim 30, the solder pad is formed on an exterior surface of the substrate.
Per claim 31, only the solder joins the joint portion to the solder pad (see figures 5A and 5B).
Per claim 32, the joint portion is spaced apart from the solder pad when the joint portion is joined to the solder pad via the solder pad (see figures 5A and 5B).
Claim Rejections - 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 33 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vicich in view of Huang et al. US 2018/0331442 (“Huang”).
Regarding claim 33, Vicich does not disclose that a hole for adjusting a spring constant of the contact is formed in the main body. Huang discloses a hole 23 for adjusting a spring constant of the contact 2 formed in the main body.
It would have been obvious to provide a hole as taught in Huang in the body the Vicich contact. The reason would have been increase the elasticity, i.e., adjust the spring constant, of the terminal, as taught in Huang ¶ 0086, 0087.
Per claim 34, a press-fit protrusion 17 adapted to be retained in the contact housing and a stopper protrusion ("Each of the electrical contacts 10 can further include a bump [not shown] for aiding in the positioning of the electrical contact 10 in an electrical connector." Col. 6, lines 1-5.) adapted to set or fix a press-fit depth are formed on the main body.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered.
Regarding the restriction by original presentation of claims 1 and 28, the examiner does not understand applicant’s arguments. Applicant argues that because of original dependent claim 7, “both species were claimed.” Original claim 7 (7. The contact according to claim 1, wherein a notch is formed in the joint portion, the first portion of the contour defined by the notch.) is generic to multiple species. Original claim 8 (8. The contact according to claim 7, wherein the notch is formed into a distal end of the joint portion opposite the main body.) is directed the species of figure 10. Applicant received an action on the merits for claims 7 and 8, directed to the species of figure 10. Now claim 1 and claim 28 are directed to the species of figures 11A/B. This is properly restricted for being directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed.
Arguments with respect to claim 15 is moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21, 22, 23, 35, and 36 are allowable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROSS N GUSHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2005. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Friday 8:00AM – 5PM EST.
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 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
