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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The amendment regarding the 35 USC 112 rejection is acceptable.
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, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Conrad (US 6921301 B2).
In regard to claim 1, Conrad discloses an electrical contact terminal comprising:
a force contact 11 extending along a longitudinal axis between a first and a second end and having a forked pair of arms 13 extending towards its first end, said arms 13 adapted to receive the device lead 32 in between thereof and having an inward bias 12 so as to establish a good electrical connection with the device lead 32, and further having a means 17 of establishing an electrical connection with a load board 29, said means 17 extending towards its second end;
a sense contact 11 (adjacent force contact 11) also extending along the longitudinal axis between a first and a second end and having a forked pair of arms 13 extending towards its first end, said arms 13 adapted to receive the device lead 32 in between thereof and having an inward bias 12 so as to establish a good electrical connection with the device lead 32, and further having a means 17 of establishing an electrical connection with a load board 29, said means 17 extending towards its second end, wherein the force contact 11 and the sense contact 11 are arranged side-by-side and are positioned to receive the same device lead 32, such that, as the device lead 32 is lowered toward the force contact 11 and the sense contact 11, the device lead 32 connects with at least one arm of the force contact 11 and at least one arm of the sense contact 11.
The recitation that "a pin-type device lead of an integrated circuit device" has not been given significant patentable weight since it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
In regard to claim 6, Conrad discloses each pair of arms 13 are provided on an inside surface with a relief cavity (between arms 13 and below 12 in fig. 1) close to their upper ends, said relief cavity allowing only a portion of the inside surface near the upper end of the arms 13 to be in contact with the device lead 32.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that “Conrad does not disclose a force contact and a sense contact which each receive the same pin-type device lead, nor does Conrad disclose that the pin-type device lead connects with at least one arm of the force contact and at least one arm of the sense contact as the pin-type device lead is lowered toward the contacts”.
Contrary to applicant’s argument,
First, Conrad discloses a force contact 11 and a sense contact 11 which each receive the same device lead 32, wherein that the device lead 32 connects with at least one arm of the force contact 11 and at least one arm of the sense contact 11 as the device lead 32 is lowered toward the contacts 11 (see fig. 11).
Second, in the claims, the terms “force” and “sense” are merely names since the claims do not recite the meaning of “force” and “sense” that can be distinguish form the reference.
Further, the recitation "force contact and sense contact" has not been given significant patentable weight since it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
In response to applicant’s argument that the contacts are arranged side-by-side and positioned so that the same pin-type device lead is received by the forked arms of both contacts.
Contrary to applicant’s argument, Conrad clearly disclose in fig. 11 that the contacts 11 are arranged side-by-side and positioned so that the same device lead 32 is received by the forked arms of both contacts 11.
In response to applicant’s argument regarding claim 6, Conrad discloses the relief cavity (between arms 13 and below 12 in fig. 1) close to the upper ends of the arms could allow only a portion of the inside surface near the upper end of the arms 13 to be in contact with the device lead 32 if the device lead 32 having a lateral or angular deviation.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Tdt
8/14/2026
/THO D TA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights