Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 16/888,667

LADDER STABILIZING ACCESSORY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 30, 2020
Examiner
MCKINNON, TERRELL L
Art Unit
3632
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
26%
Grant Probability
At Risk
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
38%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 26% of cases
26%
Career Allow Rate
19 granted / 72 resolved
-25.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
82
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
50.4%
+10.4% vs TC avg
§102
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
§112
14.2%
-25.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 72 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . This office action is a response to the reply filed November 1, 2022. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hess et al. (2014/0041965) in view of Donahey (US 5,165,501). Reg. Cl. 1, Hess et al. discloses: 1. A ladder stabilizing accessory configured to be installed on a pair of ladder rails of a ladder, the ladder stabilizing accessory comprising: a pair of connector members (182) having an adjustable clamp configured to connect to the pair of ladder rails at any position on the ladder ([0027], [0036]; a pair of leg members (148) pivotally attached to the pair of connector members; and, a pair of footing members (150) pivotally attached to the pair of leg members. Hess et al. fails to discloses, however Donahey teaches a telescopic rod positioned between the pair of connector members such that the distance between the pair of connector members is adjustable to accommodate various ladder widths (Figs. 12, 12A and 14). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify invention of Hess et al. with Donahey’s telescopic rod positioned between the pair of connector members. Doing so would provide a means of connecting the stabilizer to different ladder width dimensions. Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hess et al. (2014/0041965) in view of Donahey (US 5,165,501), as applied to claims above, and further in view of Labonte (US 6,244,382). Reg. Cl. 2, Hess discloses the scope of the connectors having semi-circular holes and pins (Figs 5, 6, and 10), but fails to disclose, however Labonte teaches: wherein each connector member of the pair of connector members (7) is comprised of a semi-circular section perforated with a plurality of openings configured to accept a pin, wherein the pin is configured to pass through one opening of the plurality of openings and a hole on each leg member of the pair of leg members such that the leg member may be locked into a selected position (Figs. 1 and 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify invention of Hess et al. with Labonte’s connector members is comprised of a semi-circular section perforated with a plurality of openings. Doing so would provide an alternate shaped connecting member with semi-circular opening for connecting leg members. Reg. Cl. 3, Hess discloses: wherein the selected position gives the pair of leg members an angle relative to the connected ladder allowing for the ladder to be positioned at a given angle. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hess et al. (2014/0041965) in view of Donahey (US 5,165,501), as applied to claims above, and further in view of Zeaman (US 2005/0011702). Reg. Cl. 4. Hess et al’s invention as modified by Donahey, fails to disclose, however, Zeaman teaches: wherein each footing member of the pair of footing members (18,19) comprises a raised segment configured to plow or push debris when positioning the ladder during use. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify invention of Hess et al. with Zeaman’s raised foot members. Doing so would provide foot members capable of moving easier over the ground, as discloses by Zeaman. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is advised to review the prior art on the PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERRELL L MCKINNON whose telephone number is (571)272-4797. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00 am to 4:30 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, Terrell L McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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. /TERRELL L MCKINNON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 30, 2020
Application Filed
Jun 02, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 01, 2022
Response Filed
Nov 01, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 14, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12570022
HYBRID SAWHORSE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569871
MOUNTING SYSTEM FOR USE IN CONNECTION WITH PAINTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12459434
ACTUATOR, REAR VIEW DEVICE AND VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 04, 2025
Patent 12435918
INSTALLATION FOOT AND REFRIGERATOR HAVING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 07, 2025
Patent 12422062
HINGE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 23, 2025
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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
26%
Grant Probability
38%
With Interview (+12.0%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 72 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month