Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/579,915

ELECTRICAL CONTACT MATERIAL, AND CONTACT, TERMINAL AND CONNECTOR MADE USING THIS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jan 17, 2024
Examiner
HYEON, HAE M
Art Unit
2831
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Furukawa Automotive Systems Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
1015 granted / 1186 resolved
+17.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1215
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
§102
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
§112
35.9%
-4.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1186 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Claim Objections Claims 1 and 2 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 5, the examiner suggests the applicant to change “CI” to -- Confidence Index (CI) --. Claim 2, line 2, the examiner suggests the applicant to change “IQ” to -- Image Quality (IQ) --. Appropriate correction is required. Specification Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure. A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art. If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives. Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps. Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the present abstract has less than 50 words in length. Also, the examiner suggests the applicant to change “CI” to -- Confidence Index (CI) --. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph [0007], line 4, the first-time occurring abbreviation “CI” should be written with a full terminology with the abbreviation enclosed within a parenthesis. Therefore, the examiner suggests the applicant to change “CI” to -- Confidence Index (CI) --. Paragraph [0007], line 8, the first-time occurring abbreviation “IQ” should be written with a full terminology with the abbreviation enclosed within a parenthesis. Therefore, the examiner suggests the applicant to change “IQ” to -- Image Quality (IQ) --. Paragraph [0023], line 3, the first-time occurring abbreviation “EBSD” should be written with a full terminology with the abbreviation enclosed within a parenthesis. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim(s) 1, 3-10, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inoue et al (JP-2020105551 A). Inoue discloses an electrical contact material 1 comprising: (claim 1) an electroconductive substrate 2, a silver-containing layer 4 including silver provided to at least part of a surface of the electroconductive substrate 2 and (claims 6 and 20) an intermediate layer 3 consisting of nickel or nickel alloy between the electroconductive substrate 2 and the silver-containing layer 4; wherein an average CI value of the silver-containing layer is between 10% and 40% or between 0.05 and 5 (see the abstract), which are within 0.6 or more in a cross section of the electrical contact material; (claim 3) wherein the silver-containing layer includes at least one element Sb; (claims 4 and 18) wherein the silver-containing layer includes a total of less than 15.0 at% of at least one element selected from the group consisting of Sb; (claims 5 and 19) wherein an average thickness of the silver-containing layer is between 0.1 µm and 2.0 µm (see the abstract), which is within 0.5 µm or more and 5.0 µm or less; and (claim 7) wherein an average thickness of the intermediate layer is 0.3 µm or more and 2.00 µm, which is within 0.01 µm or more and 3.00 µm or less Regarding claims 8-10, Inoue’s invention is a terminal material for connectors. The terminal is or can be a contact. Therefore, Inoue clearly discloses and teaches a contact, a terminal and a connector being made using the electrical contact material according to claim l. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2 and 11-17 are 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 HAE MOON HYEON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2093. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30 am - 6:00 pm. 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, Abdullah A Riyami can be reached at 571-270-3119. 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. /hmh/ /Hae Moon Hyeon/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 17, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597725
CONNECTOR MODULE WITH IMPROVED HEAT DISSIPATION PERFORMANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597741
ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR ASSEMBLY WITH BETTER ANTI-INTERFERENCE AND GROUNDING EFFECTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12580346
Plug-in device, plug-in system with a plug-in device, as well as robot with a plug-in device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575603
AEROSOL DELIVERY DEVICE WITH MULTIPLE AEROSOL DELIVERY PATHWAYS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579388
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR AEROSOL DELIVERY COMPRISING A BIODEGRADABLE OUTER BODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+10.2%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1186 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