Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/691,508

CONNECTION TERMINAL AND ANTENNA DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Mar 13, 2024
Examiner
ISLAM, HASAN Z
Art Unit
2845
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Yokowo Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
568 granted / 673 resolved
+16.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
697
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
54.1%
+14.1% vs TC avg
§102
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
§112
31.0%
-9.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 673 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 6-7 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 6 reciting five instances of “at least a part of the clamping part” is indefinite, since it’s unclear which clamping part of “a pair of clamping parts” recited in claim 3 is being referred to. For examination purposes, “at least a part of the clamping part” will be interpreted as --a part of the clamping parts--. Claim 6, last clause reciting three “or” alternatives in “at least one of a first length from the first contact part to the second contact part through at least a part of the clamping part and the coupling part, a second length from the first contact part to an open end of the support part through at least a part of the clamping part and the support part, or a third length from the second contact part to the open end through at least a part of the clamping part and the support part is less than or equal to 1/8 of a wavelength of a frequency supported by the antenna element, or at least one of a fourth length which is a shortest distance from the first contact part to the connection part through at least a part of the clamping part and at least a part of the support part, or a fifth length which is a shortest distance from the second contact part to the connection part through at least a part of the clamping part and at least a part of the support part is less than or equal to 1/16 of the wavelength of the frequency supported by the antenna element” are indefinite, since it’s NOT understood which one or more of the lengths are being applied. As such, scope of this claim cannot be ascertained. For examination purposes, last clause of claim 6 will be interpreted as --at least one of a first length from the first contact part to the second contact part through a part of the clamping parts and the coupling part, a second length from the first contact part to an open end of the support part through a part of the clamping parts and the support part, and a third length from the second contact part to the open end through a part of the clamping parts and the support part is less than or equal to 1/8 of a wavelength of a frequency supported by the antenna element, or at least one of a fourth length which is a shortest distance from the first contact part to the connection part through a part of the clamping parts and a part of the support part, and a fifth length which is a shortest distance from the second contact part to the connection part through a part of the clamping parts and a part of the support part is less than or equal to 1/16 of the wavelength of the frequency supported by the antenna element--. Claim 7, last clause reciting three “or” alternatives in “at least one of a first length from the first contact part to the second contact part through at least a part of the holding part and at least a part of the support part, a second length from the first contact part to an open end of the support part through at least a part of the holding part and the support part, or a third length from the second contact part to the open end is less than or equal to 1/8 of a wavelength of a frequency supported by the antenna element, or at least one of a fourth length from the first contact part to the connection part through at least a part of the holding part and at least a part of the support part, or a fifth length from the second contact part to the connection part through at least a part of the holding part and at least a part of the support part is less than or equal to 1/16 of the wavelength of the frequency supported by the antenna element” are indefinite, since it’s NOT understood which one or more of the lengths are being applied. As such, scope of this claim cannot be ascertained. Claims 11-12 are rejected for depending therefrom. Claim 10 reciting two instances of “a part” are indefinite, since it’s unclear whether they are related or distinct. For examination purposes, the second instance of “a part” will be interpreted as --the part--. There should be a clear recitation of interrelated structure in order to provide a complete and operable connection terminal (or antenna device). The following claim, drafted by the examiner and considered to distinguish patentably over the art of record in this application, is presented to applicant for consideration: Claim 7. (Currently Amended) A connection terminal configured to connect an antenna element for a vehicle to a substrate, the connection terminal comprising: a holding part including a first contact part and a second contact part configured to contact a holdable part of the antenna element with the holdable part being clamped therebetween; and a support part configured to support the holding part against the substrate, wherein the support part includes a connection part to be connected to the substrate, and at least one of a first length from the first contact part to the second contact part through and a third length from the second contact part to the open end is less than or equal to 1/8 of a wavelength of a frequency supported by the antenna element, or at least one of a fourth length from the first contact part to the connection part through and a fifth length from the second contact part to the connection part through . 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. Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Kozlovski” (US 7212168). Claim 1: Kozlovski discloses a connection terminal configured to connect an antenna element 12 (Fig. 2) to a substrate 16 (a skilled artisan would appreciate that panel 16 functions as a substrate by virtue of it being planar and providing mechanical/insular support to antenna unit 12), the connection terminal comprising: a holding part 46 configured to hold a holdable part 28 of the antenna element inserted from one surface 26 of the substrate into a through-hole 14 formed in the substrate, at a position on a side of another surface 16 of the substrate opposite to the one surface; and a support part 34 configured to support the holding part 46 against the substrate (see Figs. 1-2). Claim 2: Kozlovski teaches the connection terminal according to claim 1, wherein the support part includes a surface contact part 34 to be surface contact with the one surface of the substrate (see Figs. 1-2). Claims 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kozlovski (cited above) in view of “Thompson” (US 20060244667). Claim 8: Kozlovski teaches an antenna device comprising: the connection terminal according to claim 1 (see Figs. 1-2); the substrate to which the connection terminal is attached (see Figs. 1-2); the antenna element connected to the substrate through the connection terminal (see Figs. 1-2). Kozlovski fails to express teach a ground portion configured to function as a ground of the antenna element. Thompson discloses a ground portion 18 (Fig. 1) configured to function as a ground of the antenna element 11. Thompson teaches in ¶ [0014], “The antenna assembly generally comprises the antenna structure 11 and a metal ground plane 18. According to an embodiment, the antenna structure 11 is adapted to receive, but is not limited to, SDARS signals being broadcast on the 2320-2345 MHz frequency band.” Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to employ a ground portion configured to function as a ground of the antenna element in Kozlovski’s invention, in order to facilitate transmit/receive operation in desired frequency band(s). Claim 10: As best understood, Kozlovski teaches the antenna device according to claim 8, wherein at least a part of the antenna element is located outside the substrate in plan view of the substrate (see Figs. 1-2 of Kozlovski), and at least a part of the antenna element located outside the substrate overlaps with the ground portion in the plan view (see Fig. 1 of Thompson). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-5 and 9 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. Claims 6 and 11-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 7 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 7, none of the prior art shows, teaches or fairly suggests the features of “at least one of a first length from the first contact part to the second contact part through a part of the holding part and a part of the support part, a second length from the first contact part to an open end of the support part through a part of the holding part and the support part, and a third length from the second contact part to the open end is less than or equal to 1/8 of a wavelength of a frequency supported by the antenna element, or at least one of a fourth length from the first contact part to the connection part through a part of the holding part and a part of the support part, and a fifth length from the second contact part to the connection part through a part of the holding part and a part of the support part is less than or equal to 1/16 of the wavelength of the frequency supported by the antenna element.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Silva (US 10062959) Haussler (US 6714171) Terashita (US 11462822) Yun (US 11664584) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HASAN ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1719. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 9AM-7PM EST. 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, DAMEON LEVI can be reached at (571)272-2105. 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. /HASAN ISLAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 13, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603425
COUPLER AND RELATED METHOD, MODULE AND DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597715
Direct Radiating Phased Array Antenna Systems
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597704
ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING ANTENNA MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592699
ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586916
LOCATION INFORMATION FROM A RECEIVER IN A WIRELESS NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
84%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+13.2%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 673 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