DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the amendment filed on 7/17/2026.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CHINA 202320523911.7, filed on 03/10/2023.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CHINA 202310269566.3, filed on 03/10/2023.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13 recites “the insulative holder comprises an opening at top, the opening aligned…”. It should be amended to “the insulative holder comprises an opening at the top, the opening aligned…”. Applicant amended the claim to remove “the” from line 2, however, the original phrase “an opening at the top” was grammatically correct and clearly defined the location of the opening. The amendment appears to be an inadvertent omission of the definite article “the” before “top”. Applicant is required to clarify whether the omission was intentional, and if not, restore the original claim language wording.
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 9, 11, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 20210257786).
Regarding claim 9, Evans teaches (figures 1 – 6) a power terminal assembly comprising:
an insulative holder (51) comprising a body with an elliptical cross section (see cross section of body of 51; it is substantially elliptical) with a major axis, the body (see figure 2) enclosing first and second channels (57, 58) and comprising a projection (see projections where 51 is pointing to in figure 2) extending from the body orthogonally to the major axis (see figure 2); and a plurality of power terminals (60) disposed within the first and second channels (57, 58), each of the plurality of power terminals (60) comprising a cuboid-shaped mating portion (see figure 4) and a mounting portion (61) configured to make electrical and mechanical connection to a power conductor (i.e. 61 is capable of making electrical and mechanical connection to a power conductor).
Although Evans teaches that the power terminals comprise cylindrical mating portions, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the cylindrical portion of Evans to have a cuboid shape, as claimed, because the particular geometric shape of a terminal matting portion is a design choice (see MPEP 2144.04) that does not impact the function of the connector, which is making electrical and mechanical contact with the corresponding component.
Regarding claim 11, Evans teaches (figures 1 – 6) the power terminal assembly of claim 10, wherein:
for each of the plurality of power terminals (60), the mounting portion (61) comprises a sheet (see figure 4) and first and second tabs (tabs that are bent inward in 61 on figure 4) extending from opposite sides of the sheet (see figure 4).
Regarding claim 14, Evans teaches (figures 1 – 6) the power terminal assembly of claim 12, comprising:
a power cable (12) comprising a plurality of wires (see figure 2) attached to respective mounting portions (61) of the plurality of power terminals (60), wherein: the first and second tabs (tabs that are bent inward in 61 on figure 4) of the plurality of power terminals wrap respective wires of the plurality of wires (see figure 2).
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 20210257786) in view of Dang (US 8979592).
Regarding claim 10, Evans teaches (figures 1 – 6) the power terminal assembly of claim 9.
But Evans does not explicitly disclose wherein: the insulative holder comprises first and second cantilevers extending from top and bottom of the body respectively; and the first and second cantilevers are each configured for engaging a support structure configured for supporting the power conductors positioned for electrical and mechanical connection to power terminals of the plurality of power terminals.
Dang teaches (figures 4 – 6) a connector wherein: the insulative holder (24) comprises first and second cantilevers (52, 54) extending from top and bottom of the body (see figure 6) respectively; and the first and second cantilevers (52, 24) are each configured for engaging a support structure (56 engages with 44) configured for supporting the power conductors (i.e. disclosed support structure is capable of supporting power conductors) positioned for electrical and mechanical connection to power terminals (66) of the plurality of power terminals (there are multiple 66 seen in figure 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Evans with the connector as disclosed by Dang to provide wherein: the insulative holder comprises first and second cantilevers extending from top and bottom of the body respectively; and the first and second cantilevers are each configured for engaging a support structure configured for supporting the power conductors positioned for electrical and mechanical connection to power terminals of the plurality of power terminals, to improve the ease of assembly without sacrificing performance.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 20210257786) in view of Dang (US 8979592) and further in view of Droesbeke (US 20210057854).
Regarding claim 12, Evans teaches (figures 1 – 6) the power terminal assembly of claim 11.
But Evans and Dang do not explicitly disclose a power terminal assembly comprising:
a ferrule comprising first and second curved tabs crimping the insulative holder from left and right and features at top and bottom engaging distal ends of the first and second cantilevers of the insulative holder so as to retain the plurality of power terminals in position.
Droesbeke teaches (figure 2A) a power terminal assembly comprising:
a ferrule (30) comprising first and second curved tabs (66) crimping the insulative holder (28) from left and right (see figure 2A) and features at top and bottom engaging distal ends of the first and second cantilevers (68; ¶0056) of the insulative holder (28) so as to retain the plurality of power terminals (12) in position.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Evans and Dang with the connector as disclosed by Droesbeke to provide a ferrule comprising first and second curved tabs crimping the insulative holder from left and right and features at top and bottom engaging distal ends of the first and second cantilevers of the insulative holder so as to retain the plurality of power terminals in position, to improve the shielding for the wires.
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 20210257786) in view of Demaratos (US 11404826).
Regarding claim 13, Evans teaches (figures 1 – 6) the power terminal assembly of claim 11.
But Evans does not explicitly disclose wherein: the insulative holder comprises an opening at top, the opening aligned with recesses between the cuboid-shaped mating portions and the first and second tabs of each of the plurality of power terminals; and the power terminal assembly comprises a terminal position assurance component disposed in the opening at the top of the insulative holder and extending into the recesses of each of the plurality of power terminals.
Demaratos teaches (figures 2 – 10) a connector wherein: the insulative holder (50) comprises an opening (opening to the right of 61 in figure 7) at top, the opening aligned with recesses (see figure 5; recess where 10 inserts into) between the cuboid-shaped mating portions (mating portion of 60) and the first and second tabs of each of the plurality of power terminals (60); and
the power terminal assembly (assembly of 60) comprises a terminal position assurance component (1) disposed in the opening at the top of the insulative holder (50) and extending into the recesses of each of the plurality of power terminals (i.e. see figures 7 and 8 for locking between 1 and the terminal 60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Evans with the connector as disclosed by Demaratos to provide wherein the insulative holder comprises an opening at the top, the opening aligned with recesses between the cuboid-shaped mating portions and the first and second tabs of each of the plurality of power terminals; and the power terminal assembly comprises a terminal position assurance component disposed in the opening at the top of the insulative holder and extending into the recesses of each of the plurality of power terminals, to improve the clearance and creepage in the high voltage connector assembly (see Summary of Invention in Demaratos).
Claim(s) 15 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 20210257786) in view of Maesoba (US 10297932).
Regarding claim 15, Evans teaches (figures 1 – 6) the power terminal assembly of claim 14.
But Evans does not explicitly disclose wherein: each of the plurality of power terminals comprises third and fourth tabs extending from the opposite sides of the sheet; and the power cable comprises insulative layers enclosing respective wires of the plurality of wires and wrapped by the third and fourth tabs of respective power terminals of the plurality of power terminals.
Maesoba teaches (figures 1, 13) a connector wherein: each of the plurality of power terminals (21A) comprises third and fourth tabs (i.e. see multiple bent tabs between 21A and 29 in figure 1) extending from the opposite sides of the sheet (see figure 1); and
the power cable (10A) comprises insulative layers (see figure 1) enclosing respective wires of the plurality of wires (plurality of wires connecting to 21A) and wrapped by the third and fourth tabs of respective power terminals of the plurality of power terminals (see figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Evans with the connector as disclosed by Maesoba to provide wherein each of the plurality of power terminals comprises third and fourth tabs extending from the opposite sides of the sheet; and the power cable comprises insulative layers enclosing respective wires of the plurality of wires and wrapped by the third and fourth tabs of respective power terminals of the plurality of power terminals, to improve the connector’s adaptability by providing a connector structure that can be replaced with different types of connectors without any major structural changes.
Regarding claim 16, Evans teaches (figures 1 – 6) the power terminal assembly of claim 15.
But Evans does not explicitly disclose wherein: the power cable comprises a sheath enclosing the insulative layers; and a rear end of the ferrule crimps the sheath.
Maesoba teaches (figures 1, 13) a connector wherein: the power cable (10A) comprises a sheath (see figure 1) enclosing the insulative layers (see figure 1); and a rear end of the ferrule (29) crimps the sheath (see figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Evans with the connector as disclosed by Maesoba to provide wherein the power cable comprises a sheath enclosing the insulative layers; and a rear end of the ferrule crimps the sheath, to improve the connector’s adaptability by providing a connector structure that can be replaced with different types of connectors without any major structural changes.
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 20210257786) in view of Dang (US 8979592) and further in view of Droesbeke (US 20210057854) and Maesoba (US 10297932).
Regarding claim 17, Evans teaches (figures 1 – 6) the power terminal assembly of claim 12, wherein:
the insulative holder (51) has an elliptical cross-section (see cross section of body of 51; it is substantially elliptical).
But Evans, Dang, and Droesbeke do not explicitly disclose wherein the ferrule is in hollow cylindrical shape.
Maesoba teaches (figures 1, 13) a connector wherein the ferrule (29) is in hollow cylindrical shape (i.e. see shape of 29 in figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Evans, Dang, and Droesbeke with the connector as disclosed by Maesoba to provide wherein the ferrule is in hollow cylindrical shape, to improve the connector’s adaptability by providing a connector structure that can be replaced with different types of connectors without any major structural changes.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 1 – 8, 18 – 20 are allowed.
Regarding claim 1, the prior art of record fails to teach wherein the first and second cavities are symmetrical to each other such that the signal terminal assembly and power terminal assembly are interchangeable in the first and second cavities in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim.
Claims 2 – 8 depend on allowable claim 1, therefore they are also allowed.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art of record fails to teach a first portion comprising a first opening configured to receive the distal end of the first latch and a second opening configured to receive the signal terminal assembly when the position assurance component is in an engaged position and a second portion comprising a third opening configured to receive the distal end of portion of the second latch and a fourth opening configured to receive the power terminal assembly when the position assurance component is in the engaged position in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim.
Claims 19 and 20 depend on allowable claim 18, therefore they are also allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8 – 17, filed on 7/17/2026, with respect to drawing objections, the objection to the specification, the claim objections, the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections, and the prior art rejections of claims 1 – 8, 18 – 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the drawings has been withdrawn. The objection to the specification has been withdrawn. The objections of claims 1 – 2 have been withdrawn. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 16 has been withdrawn. The prior art rejections of claims 1 – 8, 18 – 20 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 7/17/2026 regarding the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 9 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 9, Applicant argues “the claimed geometric shape may affect the function of the connector because it may enable the power terminal assembly to be interchangeable with a signal terminal assembly in a same space of a connector housing. Further, Evans nowhere discloses or suggests that its power terminal perform the functions of the claimed power terminals. Thus, it would not have been a simple design choice to enable interchangeability.” These arguments are not persuasive. The claim does not recite a connector housing, a signal terminal assembly, or interchangeability between power and signal assemblies. Accordingly, the asserted interchangeability is not a limitation of the claimed subject matter in claim 9, and cannot, by itself, distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See MPEP 2145 (VI). Evans teaches a terminal having a cylindrical mating portion and a mounting portion configured to make an electrical and mechanical connection to a power conductor (¶0042 in Evans). The relevant difference between Evans and the claimed subject matter is the geometric shape of the mating portion of the power terminals. As explained in the rejection, selecting a cuboid shape instead of the cylindrical shape disclosed by Evans would have been a matter of design choice that does not impact the function of the power terminals, which is achieving the claimed electrical and mechanical connection with a corresponding component.
Further, Applicant’s specification states that “the insulative holder may be configured to both hold the power terminal and match the dimensions of the signal terminal assembly such that the power terminal assembly can be interchangeable with the signal terminal assembly” (see ¶0101). Nowhere in Applicant’s specification is it disclosed that the geometric shape of the mating portion of the power terminals enables interchangeability. Thus, Applicant’s own disclosure attributes interchangeability to the configuration and dimensions of the insulative holder, rather than specifically to the geometric shape of the mating portion of the power terminals. Further, Applicant has not explained why the claimed shape of the mating portion of the power terminal is necessary to achieve the recited electrical and mechanical connection or how the shape affects the interchangeability of the power terminal assembly with the signal terminal assembly. It appears that if the mating portion of the power terminal were to have a different shape, it could still provide the recited electrical and mechanical connection while maintaining interchangeability with the signal terminal assembly, since according to Applicant disclosure in ¶0101 of the specification, the shape of the insulative holder is what enables interchangeability. Therefore, the rejection of claim 9 is maintained.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Carlos E. Lopez-Pagan whose telephone number is (703)756-5734. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30a - 5:00p.
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, Tulsidas Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2098. 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.
/CARLOS E LOPEZ-PAGAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
