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 .
Claims 1-21 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 11, filed 07/08/2026, with respect to claims objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claims 1-21 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 11, filed 07/08/2026, with respect to 35 USC § 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-21 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 11, filed 07/08/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-21 under 35 USC § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Carvalho and Marsh. See relevant sections below for details.
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 at least one blocking projection (claim 20) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carvalho et al. (US 20220368071), hereinafter Carvalho, in view of Marsh et al. (EP 3251175B1), hereinafter Marsh.
Regarding claim 1, Carvalho discloses a vibration-resistant electromechanical flat socket terminal (flat socket contact device 1, Fig. 1) for an electrical connection comprising: a cuboid tab contact receptacle (flat socket body 10, Fig. 1) into which a cuboid tab contact section (tab contact 510. Fig. 1) of an electrical mating terminal (tab contact device 5, Fig. 1) for making electrical contact with the flat socket terminal can be plugged (Fig. 2), wherein the tab contact receptacle is formed between a plug contact section (contact chamber 110, Fig. 1) of an electromechanical connection piece (flat socket body 10, Fig. 1) and a mechanical contact spring cage (contact spring cage 20, Fig. 1 and 3), formed apart therefrom, of the flat socket terminal (as shown in Fig. 1), the contact spring cage having walls forming a contact chamber (receiving body 200, Fig. 1 and 3).
However, Carvalho fails to explicitly disclose the contact spring cage having walls forming a contact chamber that receives the plug contact section and is configured to receive the tab contact section of the electrical mating terminal such that the contact spring cage is configured to surround at least portions of the plug contact section and the tab contact section.
Marsh teaches the contact spring cage (cage 20, Figs. 1-7) having walls forming a contact chamber that receives the plug contact section (contact region 110, Figs. 1-7) and is configured to receive the tab contact section (contact device 3, Fig. 7) of the electrical mating terminal such that the contact spring cage is configured to surround at least portions of the plug contact section and the tab contact section (see Fig. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Marsh to modify the invention of Carvalho to provide a contact spring cage having walls that form a contact chamber and is configured to surround portions of the plug contact section and the tab contact section. One would be motivated to make this modification to increase the fitment between the tab contact of the mating terminal with the plug contact section.
Regarding claim 2, Carvalho discloses the flat socket terminal according to claim 1, wherein: the single flat socket terminal (Par. 0024, flat socket contact device 1) is formed as a terminal which is rigidly mechanically connected in at least or exactly two parts (see Fig. 1) from the plug contact section (Par. 0024, contact chamber 110) and the contact spring cage (Par. 0027, tab contact receptacle 20), the contact spring cage is built on the plug contact section with a substantially flat form, and an upper inner side of the contact spring cage and an outer side of the plug contact section delimit the tab contact receptacle (see Fig. 3), and/or at least one further lateral inner side of the contact spring cage delimit the tab contact receptacle.
Regarding claim 3, Carvalho discloses the flat socket terminal according to claim 1.
However, Carvalho fails to disclose wherein: the plug contact section of the connection piece is formed as a tab, at least the plug contact section of the connection piece is formed as a materially bonded single piece or integrally, and/or the plug contact section has a plurality of electromechanical contacting regions at/in the tab contact receptacle.
Marsh teaches wherein: the plug contact section (contact region 110) of the connection piece is formed as a tab (see Figs. 1-7), at least the plug contact section of the connection piece is formed as a materially bonded single piece or integrally (see Fig. 7), and/or the plug contact section has a plurality of electromechanical contacting regions at/in the tab contact receptacle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Marsh to modify the invention of Carvalho to provide the plug contact section of the connection pieces as a tab and formed as a materially bonded single piece. One would be motivated to make this modification to simplify manufacturing while maintaining connection of the tab contact and the plug contact section.
Regarding claim 4, Carvalho discloses the flat socket terminal according to claim 3, wherein the contact spring cage: is accessible for the tab contact section at at least or exactly one side (see Fig. 1), is formed as a single piece, as a materially bonded single piece or integrally, and/or is formed as a bent spring and/or a stamped spring (see Fig. 1).
Regarding the contact spring cage formed as a bent spring and/or a stamped spring, this product-by-process feature does not distinguish from the product of Carvalho since the tab contact receptacle 250 can be formed in multiple ways. Per MPEP 2113 (I), product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). In this case, the claimed process of making the contact spring cage as a bent spring and/or a stamped spring does not distinguish from the product.
Regarding claim 5, Carvalho discloses the flat socket terminal according to claim 1, wherein: the contact spring cage is formed as substantially closed at at least three, at least four or at five sides (see Fig. 1), a cover wall of the contact spring cage has at least one mechanical cover contact spring (Par. 0033, contact spring 210) protruding or projecting into the tab contact receptacle, at least one side wall of the contact spring cage has a mechanical side contact spring (Par. 0040, spring arm 310) protruding or projecting into the tab contact receptacle, and/or the at least one cover contact spring and/or the at least one side contact spring is formed as a contact spring bent by approximately 180° into the tab contact receptacle (see Fig. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 6, Carvalho discloses the flat socket terminal according to claim 5, wherein: the contact springs (Par. 0040, spring arm 310) center the tab contact section plugged into the tab contact receptacle there and push the tab contact section against the plug contact section, a spring direction of the at least one cover contact spring and a spring direction of the at least one side contact spring are substantially perpendicular to each other (see Fig. 3), the at least one cover contact spring and the at least one side contact spring extend substantially in a longitudinal direction of the flat socket terminal (see Fig. 3), and the cover contact spring and the side contact spring has exactly or at least one mechanical contact projection for making electromechanical contact with the tab contact section (see Fig. 2-4).
Regarding claim 7, Carvalho discloses the flat socket terminal according to claim 5, wherein at/in the tab contact receptacle: the at least one cover contact spring (Par. 0033, contact spring 210) is configured to be spring-loaded in a vertical direction of the flat socket terminal above the plug contact section (see Fig. 3), the at least one side contact spring is configured to be spring-loaded in a transverse direction of the flat socket terminal above the plug contact section (see Fig. 3), and/or two side contact springs situated opposite each other in the transverse direction are configured to be spring-loaded against each other (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, Carvalho discloses the flat socket terminal according to claim 1, wherein: the contact spring cage (Par. 0027, tab contact receptacle 20) has a bottom wall via which the contact spring cage is fixed to the plug contact section, the two side walls each have a through opening through which the plug contact section is plugged into the contact spring cage (see Fig. 1), and the plug contact section is fixed in the receptacle body on the bottom wall by a mounting means (Par. 0036, retaining device 220).
PNG
media_image1.png
510
795
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Carvalho discloses the flat socket terminal according to claim 5, wherein: a through opening, on an inside of the socket terminal, of the side wall is dimensioned such that substantially the whole plug contact section can be plugged through in a transverse direction (see Fig. 1), the through opening on the inside of the socket terminal is dimensioned such that at least one blocking shoulder (see Fig. 1 above, blocking shoulder 12a) of the connection piece sits on an outside of the receptacle body, and a through opening, on an outside of the socket terminal, of the side wall is dimensioned such that at least one blocking shoulder (see Fig. 1 above, blocking shoulder 12b) of the plug contact section sits on an inside of the receptacle body (see Fig. 1 above).
Regarding claim 10, Carvalho discloses the flat socket terminal according to claim 8, wherein: a mounting tab (Par. 0036, retaining device 220) of the bottom wall is exposed from the bottom wall, the mounting tab engages around an edge of the plug contact section and fixes the receptacle body on the plug contact section (see Fig. 1), and a free end section of the mounting tab is bent at/in the tab contact receptacle into a recess of the plug contact section (Par. 0036, “at least one retaining device 220 which is designed as a bent-over retaining lug 220”, see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, Carvalho discloses a vibration-resistant electrical connector (Par. 0024, connection 0) for a vehicle (see Par. 0019, “The connection 0 may be for a vehicle, such as a vehicle having an electric traction motor.”) comprising: a connector housing (socket portion 11, Fig. 1); and an electromechanical flat socket terminal (flat socket contact device 1, Fig. 1) configured thereon/therein, the flat socket terminal including a cuboid tab contact receptacle (flat socket body 10, Fig. 1) into which a cuboid tab contact section (tab contact 510, Fig. 1) of an electrical mating terminal (tab contact device 5, Fig. 1) for making electrical contact with the flat socket terminal can be plugged (see Fig. 2), wherein the tab contact receptacle is formed between a plug contact section (Par. 0024, contact chamber 110) of an electromechanical connection piece (Par. 0029, connection portion 12) and a mechanical contact spring cage (Par. 0027, tab contact receptacle 20), formed apart therefrom, of the flat socket terminal, the contact spring cage having walls forming a contact chamber (receiving body 200, Fig. 1 and 3).
However, Carvalho fails to explicitly disclose the contact spring cage having walls forming a contact chamber that receives the plug contact section and is configured to receive the tab contact section of the electrical mating terminal such that the contact spring cage is configured to surround at least portions of the plug contact section and the tab contact section.
Marsh teaches the contact spring cage (cage 20, Figs. 1-7) having walls forming a contact chamber that receives the plug contact section (contact region 110, Figs. 1-7) and is configured to receive the tab contact section (contact device 3, Fig. 7) of the electrical mating terminal such that the contact spring cage is configured to surround at least portions of the plug contact section and the tab contact section (see Fig. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Marsh to modify the invention of Carvalho to provide a contact spring cage having walls that form a contact chamber and is configured to surround portions of the plug contact section and the tab contact section. One would be motivated to make this modification to increase the fitment between the tab contact of the mating terminal with the plug contact section.
Regarding claim 12, Carvalho discloses the vibration-resistant electrical connector according to claim 11, wherein: the single flat socket terminal (Par. 0024, flat socket contact device 1) is formed as a terminal which is rigidly mechanically connected in at least or exactly two parts from the plug contact section and the contact spring cage (see Fig. 1), the contact spring cage is built on the plug contact section with a substantially flat form, and an upper inner side of the contact spring cage and an outer side of the plug contact section delimit the tab contact receptacle (see Fig. 3), and/or at least one further lateral inner side of the contact spring cage delimit the tab contact receptacle.
Regarding claim 13, Carvalho discloses the vibration-resistant electrical connector according to claim 11.
However, Carvalho fails to disclose wherein: the plug contact section of the connection piece is formed as a tab, at least the plug contact section of the connection piece is formed as a materially bonded single piece or integrally, and/or the plug contact section has a plurality of electromechanical contacting regions at/in the tab contact receptacle.
Marsh teaches wherein: the plug contact section (contact region 110) of the connection piece is formed as a tab (see Figs. 1-7), at least the plug contact section of the connection piece is formed as a materially bonded single piece or integrally (see Fig. 7), and/or the plug contact section has a plurality of electromechanical contacting regions at/in the tab contact receptacle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Marsh to modify the invention of Carvalho to provide the plug contact section of the connection pieces as a tab and formed as a materially bonded single piece. One would be motivated to make this modification to simplify manufacturing while maintaining connection of the tab contact and the plug contact section.
Regarding claim 14, Carvalho discloses the vibration-resistant electrical connector according to claim 13, wherein the contact spring cage: is accessible for the tab contact section at at least or exactly one side, is formed as a single piece, as a materially bonded single piece or integrally (see Fig. 1), and/or is formed as a bent spring and/or a stamped spring.
Regarding the contact spring cage formed as a bent spring and/or a stamped spring, this product-by-process feature does not distinguish from the product of Carvalho since the tab contact receptacle 250 can be formed in multiple ways. Per MPEP 2113 (I), product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). In this case, the claimed process of making the contact spring cage as a bent spring and/or a stamped spring does not distinguish from the product.
Regarding claim 15, Carvalho discloses the vibration-resistant electrical connector according to claim 11, wherein: the contact spring cage is formed as substantially closed at at least three, at least four or at five sides (see Fig. 1), a cover wall of the contact spring cage has at least one mechanical cover contact spring (Par. 0033, contact spring 210) protruding or projecting into the tab contact receptacle, at least one side wall of the contact spring cage has a mechanical side contact spring (Par. 0040, spring arm 310) protruding or projecting into the tab contact receptacle, and/or the at least one cover contact spring and/or the at least one side contact spring is formed as a contact spring bent by approximately 180° into the tab contact receptacle (see Fig. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 16, Carvalho discloses the vibration-resistant electrical connector according to claim 15, wherein: the contact springs (Par. 0040, spring arm 310) center the tab contact section plugged into the tab contact receptacle there and push the tab contact section against the plug contact section, a spring direction of the at least one cover contact spring and a spring direction of the at least one side contact spring are substantially perpendicular to each other (see Fig. 3), the at least one cover contact spring and the at least one side contact spring extend substantially in a longitudinal direction of the flat socket terminal (see Fig. 3), and the cover contact spring (210) and the side contact spring (310) has exactly or at least one mechanical contact projection for making electromechanical contact with the tab contact section (see Fig. 2-4).
Regarding claim 17, Carvalho discloses the vibration-resistant electrical connector according to claim 15, wherein at/in the tab contact receptacle: the at least one cover contact spring (Par. 0033, contact spring 210) is configured to be spring-loaded in a vertical direction of the flat socket terminal above the plug contact section (see Fig. 1), the at least one side contact spring is configured to be spring-loaded in a transverse direction of the flat socket terminal above the plug contact section (see Fig. 2), and/or two side contact springs situated opposite each other in the transverse direction are configured to be spring-loaded against each other (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, Carvalho discloses the vibration-resistant electrical connector according to claim 11, wherein: the contact spring cage (Par. 0027, tab contact receptacle 20) has a bottom wall via which the contact spring cage is fixed to the plug contact section, two side walls each have a through opening through which the plug contact section is plugged into the contact spring cage (see Fig. 1), and the plug contact section is fixed in the receptacle body on the bottom wall by a mounting means (Par. 0036, retaining device 220).
Regarding claim 19, Carvalho discloses a vibration-resistant electrical connection (Par. 0024, connection 0) for a vehicle (see Par. 0019, “The connection 0 may be for a vehicle, such as a vehicle having an electric traction motor.”) comprising: an electromechanical flat socket terminal (Par. 0024, flat socket contact device 1) including cuboid tab contact receptacle (Par. 0027, flat socket body 10), the tab contact receptacle formed between a plug contact section (Par. 0024, contact chamber 110) of an electromechanical connection piece (Par. 0029, connection portion 12) and a mechanical contact spring cage (Par. 0027, tab contact receptacle 20), formed apart therefrom, of the flat socket terminal; and an electrical mating terminal (Par. 0024, tab contact device 5) having cuboid tab contact section (Par. 0025, tab contact 510) plugged into the tab contact receptacle for making electrical contact with the flat socket terminal, wherein the tab contact section is formed so that it partially complements the tab contact receptacle of the flat socket terminal (see Fig. 3 and 4); wherein the contact spring cage having walls forming a contact chamber (receiving body 200, Fig. 1 and 3).
However, Carvalho fails to explicitly disclose the contact spring cage having walls forming a contact chamber that receives the plug contact section and is configured to receive the tab contact section of the electrical mating terminal such that the contact spring cage is configured to surround at least portions of the plug contact section and the tab contact section.
Marsh teaches the contact spring cage (cage 20, Figs. 1-7) having walls forming a contact chamber that receives the plug contact section (contact region 110, Figs. 1-7) and is configured to receive the tab contact section (contact device 3, Fig. 7) of the electrical mating terminal such that the contact spring cage is configured to surround at least portions of the plug contact section and the tab contact section (see Fig. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Marsh to modify the invention of Carvalho to provide a contact spring cage having walls that form a contact chamber and is configured to surround portions of the plug contact section and the tab contact section. One would be motivated to make this modification to increase the fitment between the tab contact of the mating terminal with the plug contact section.
Regarding claim 20, Carvalho discloses the electrical connection according to claim 19, wherein: the tab contact section has at least one partially complementary clamping means (Par. 0044, clamping device 330, clamping recess 530), corresponding to the contact spring cage, a mechanical contact region of a contact spring of the contact spring cage is seated in the clamping means (see Fig. 2), and at least one blocking projection (locking projection 540, Fig. 1) of the tab contact section sits on an outer edge of an opening of the tab contact receptacle (Par. 0027, “The tab contact 510 can, on at least one side, in particular a large-surface-area side, have at least one locking projection 540 which can be seated on/at an outer edge of an opening of the contact chamber 110”).
Regarding claim 21, Carvalho discloses the electrical connection according to claim 19, wherein a mechanical contact region of a contact spring and a clamping means of the tab contact section are mutually designed such that, in case of vibrations on the connection, the tab contact section has the tendency to move further into the tab contact receptacle (Par. 0045, “as shown in FIG. 2, the clamping projections 330 of the mechanical clamping spring arms 310 engage into the respective clamping recesses 530 of the tab contact 510 and securely retain these in the contact chamber 110 even when vibrations are applied since the mechanical clamping spring 30 is fastened in the contact chamber 110 in all translational and rotational directions”).
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.
/JEFFREY MOUNTAIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights