Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 29/773,725

CONNECTOR

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Mar 11, 2021
Examiner
MELVIN, BRYAN NOLAN
Art Unit
2971
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
Samtec Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
96%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 10m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 96% — above average
96%
Career Allow Rate
251 granted / 262 resolved
+35.8% vs TC avg
Minimal -0% lift
Without
With
+-0.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 10m
Avg Prosecution
3 currently pending
Career history
265
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§102
4.2%
-35.8% vs TC avg
§112
84.4%
+44.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 262 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Continued Prosecution Application The request filed on November 26, 2025 for a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) under 37 CFR 1.53(d) based on Application No. 29/773,725 is acceptable and a CPA has been established. An action on the merits follows. An office action under Ex parte Quayle was issued on September 19, 2025, closing prosecution on the merits and permitting amendment only as to formal matters. See MPEP § 714.14. Applicant filed a reply on November 13, 2025, including replacement drawings and an amended specification. On November 26, 2025, applicant filed a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) under 37 CFR 1.53(d), along with an Information Disclosure Statement. No drawings were submitted with the CPA. Under CPA practice, prosecution is reopened, and only amendments filed with the CPA may be considered. See MPEP § 201.06(d) (“New matter in a CPA is not entered and is not the subject of a rejection.”). Appendix The appendix submitted by Applicant with the original papers is understood to form no part of the claim or its disclosure. However, although the appendix may form antecedent basis for certain amendments to the application, it may not constitute a part of the drawing disclosure. The appendix has been placed in the file. Per Applicant’s request upon allowance, the Appendix will be cancelled because it contains descriptions of embodiments not shown in the drawings or described in the specification. Therefore, the proposed amendment to the appendix and specification dated 11/13/2025 will not be entered. Acknowledgement of Amendment Acknowledgement is here made of the applicant’s Amendment of November 13, 2025 including amendments to the specification and replacement sheets for Figures 1-10. The merits of the application have been carefully reconsidered in view of Applicants’ remarks and amendments but NOT entered into the CPA because they were not submitted with the CPA that was filed on November 26, 2025, as required by 37 CFR 1.53(d) and they include modifications to the drawings that alter the appearance of the originally disclosed design and therefore constitute amendments that cannot be entered under CPA practice. See MPEP § 201.06(d) and MPEP § 1503.02. As a result, the drawings and specification of record are the originally filed materials from March 11, 2021. The replacement drawings submitted November 13, 2025 are refused entry under 37 CFR 1.153(d) and MPEP § 201.06(d) because: They were not filed with the CPA and therefore do not carry forward. They contain substantive modifications to the originally disclosed design. Amendments introducing such modifications constitute new matter and therefore cannot be entered in a CPA. (CPA practice requires that such amendments be refused entry rather than rejected. See MPEP § 201.06(d).) Claim Rejection 35 U.S.C. § 112, (a) and (b) The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, (a) and (b), as the claimed invention is not described in such full, clear, concise and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use the same, and fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The claim is indefinite and non-enabling for the following: The replacement drawings filed November 13, 2025 show inconsistent treatment across views and depict the connector with boundary lines applied to the separated end surfaces. Boundary lines serve to delimit the extent of claimed surface area. See MPEP § 1503.02(III). Figures 1–2 retain the original dash-dot-dash boundary lines. Figures 3–4 replace the same dash-dot-dash boundary lines with das-dash broken lines, which indicate subject matter that forms no part of the claimed design per MPEP §1503.02(II). Converting boundary lines to broken lines changes originally claimed surfaces into surfaces that form no part of the claimed design, which is a substantive change to the claimed design. Additional modifications appear in the replacement figures that alter line types, contours, and/or visible features compared to the originally filed drawings. These changes also modify the design’s appearance and are not supported by the original disclosure. Under CPA practice, none of these amendments may be entered. Further, all views must be consistent in their depiction of the design. The replacement drawings show boundary lines on the connector end surfaces in Figs. 1–2 and the broken lines in the same locations in Figs. 3–4. This results in two conflicting representations of the claimed design, creating ambiguity and rendering the claim indefinite. Please see Examiner's annotated drawings on the following page for identification of the non-enabled subject matter. ORIGINAL REPLACEMENT PNG media_image1.png 1086 1209 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 1160 1284 media_image2.png Greyscale FIG. 3 PNG media_image3.png 1227 1303 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 1210 1266 media_image4.png Greyscale FIG. 4 In Figures 3 & 4 of the Examiner's annotated drawings above, the overall appearance of the surfaces WITHIN the highlighted boundary is shown differently between the figures and cannot be determined. The highlighted surface shows an overall difference in the appearance than that of the originally claimed design. The dash-dot-dash boundary lines are shown as dash-dash broken lines in the replacement sheets. ORIGINAL REPLACEMENT PNG media_image5.png 1748 1275 media_image5.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 1856 1258 media_image6.png Greyscale FIG. 1 In Figure 1 of the Examiner's annotated drawings above, the overall appearance of the highlighted areas identified by annotated arrow “A” is shown differently between the figures and cannot be determined. The highlighted areas show an overall difference in the appearance than that of the originally claimed design. The same issue is also present in Figure 2. PNG media_image7.png 1208 1340 media_image7.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 1210 1266 media_image4.png Greyscale FIG. 1 FIG. 4 In Figures 1 & 4 of the Examiner's annotated drawings above, the overall appearance of the highlighted surfaces is shown differently between the figures and cannot be determined. In Figure 1, dash-dot-dash boundary lines are used on the claimed surface. The same surface, in Figure 4, is shown with dash-dash broken lines as if the surface forms no part of the claimed design. Corrected drawing sheets are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The corrected drawing sheets must match the contours and surface boundaries of the originally filed drawings, apply boundary lines consistently in all views where appropriate and make no changes to the claimed design’s appearance. If applicant's response to the requirements set forth above is incomplete or includes new matter, the examiner may hold the response non-compliant. Replacement Drawings 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. If all the figures on a drawing sheet are canceled, a replacement sheet is not required. A marked-up copy of the drawing sheet (labeled as “Annotated Sheet”) including an annotation showing that all the figures on that drawing sheet have been canceled must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change to the drawings. 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. When preparing new or replacement drawings, be careful to avoid introducing new matter. 35 USC §132 and 37 CFR §1.121(f). Contact Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN N. MELVIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9675. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9AM-4:30PM. 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, Sandra Snapp can be reached on (571)272-8364. 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. /BRYAN N. MELVIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2912
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 11, 2021
Application Filed
Nov 13, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 14, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1122191
Wireless charger
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent D1121551
Housing for electric motor
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent D1120871
Wireless Charger
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent D1118502
Wireless Power Bank
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent D1118503
Power Bank
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
96%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (-0.4%)
1y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 262 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