Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 17/083,035

CAGE ASSEMBLY FOR USE WITH PIVOTAL GANGWAY

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Oct 28, 2020
Examiner
MEKHAEIL, SHIREF M
Art Unit
3634
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Safe Rack LLC
OA Round
4 (Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
363 granted / 580 resolved
+10.6% vs TC avg
Strong +65% interview lift
Without
With
+64.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
615
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
41.8%
+1.8% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 580 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . The amendment filled 12/16/2025 has been entered. Claim1 has been amended. Therefore, claims 1-8 remain pending in the application. Previous 35 USC § 112 rejections have been withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments to the claims. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites the limitation "the bottom" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bennett, US (20110127111). In regards to claim 1 Bennett discloses: A cage assembly (10, cage 70; figs. 1, 2) configured to raise and lower with respect to a container (2) having an opening closed by a hatch cover (6), the cage assembly comprising: a rail structure (72, 74) having a proximal side (right hand side at gangway 30), a distal side (opposite to 30) opposite to the proximal side (right and left hand sides as shown in fig. 2 and annotated drawings below), and first and second ends (top and bottom ends 74; fig. 1) defining a generally rectangular enclosed area open at the bottom (quadrilateral shaped; as described in paragraph [0026]; excerpt below and open at the bottom where to provide access to hatch 6); said rail structure defining an opening in said proximal side so that a worker can access the enclosed area (free end 34 opening to gangway 30 as shown in fig. 1); said rail structure further comprising a plurality of horizontal rails (shown as 72 in fig. 1 and side rails in fig. 4; to clarify, at least two horizontal rails on the proximal and distal sides, as shown in annotated fig. 4 below, shown as one in fig. 1 since fig. 1 is a top view) including a top rail (top rail 72 in fig. 1; shown hatched cross section in fig. 4 and top rail 74 in fig. 4; see annotated drawings below) and a lower rail (lower rail below 72 in fig. 1; shown hatched cross section in fig. 4 and lower rail below 74 in fig. 4; see annotated drawings below); said top rail having a generally rectangular configuration to define said enclosed area (two sides 72 & two sides 74 forming rectangular configuration as shown in fig. 1); and said rail structure defining a respective bump out on at least one of said proximal and distal sides thereof (bump outs on both proximal and distal sides; see annotated drawings of figs. 1 and 4 below) to facilitate opening of the hatch cover (the safety cage described as “sufficiently sized to allow simultaneous access to multiple, and preferably all, hatch openings of a tank” as described in paragraph [0037]; and where the bump outs as annotated below allows/facilitates for room to the worker to move around and access said hatches when located at perimeter edges of the cage), said lower rail being located directly below the top rail (as shown in annotated drawings of figs. 1 and 4 below) as the lower rail and top rail extend along a portion of an associated one of the proximal and distal sides (see portions of the proximal and distal sides along which the rails extends; annotated fig. 1 below, note that the edges of the proximal and distal sides are still considered a portion of the sides), the bump out being formed at an other portion of the associated one of the proximal and distal sides (see portions of the proximal and distal sides along which the bump outs extends; fig. 1; reproduced below) at least in part by the lower rail transitioning from being directly below the top rail to being laterally outboard of the top rail (see at least portion of the lower rail outboard of top rail in annotated drawings below) to define a clearance (see annotated drawings below) so as not to interfere with the hatch cover when opened (not interfering with hatch cover 6 as shown in figs. 1-4). PNG media_image1.png 529 1023 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 542 767 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 158 690 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 556 927 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 411 792 media_image5.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 775 582 media_image6.png Greyscale In regards to claim 7 Bennett discloses said bump out is located across from said opening (Bump out at distal end as shown in annotated drawings above). In regards to claim 8 Bennett discloses wherein said bump out comprises first and second bump outs located on said proximal side and said distal side of said rail structure, respectively (bump outs on both sides as shown in annotated drawings above). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-6 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 12/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because: Applicant argues “the claim requires at least one "bump out" in at least one of the proximal side and distal side of the rail structure, with the proximal side "defining an opening ... so that a worker can access the enclosed area [defined by the rail structure]." The rail structure further has "first and second ends," but the claimed bump out is not formed in them”; examiner respectfully disagrees and presents that Bennet discloses a rail structure (72, 74) having a proximal side (right hand side at gangway 30), a distal side (opposite to 30) opposite to the proximal side (right and left hand sides as shown in fig. 2 and annotated drawings above), and first and second ends (top and bottom ends 74; fig. 1) defining a generally rectangular enclosed area open at the bottom (quadrilateral shaped; as described in paragraph [0026]; excerpt below and open at the bottom where to provide access to hatch 6); said rail structure defining an opening in said proximal side so that a worker can access the enclosed area (free end 34 opening to gangway 30 as shown in fig. 1). Note that as shown in the annotated drawings of fig. 1 below the bump outs are indeed in proximal side (right hand side at gangway 30) and distal side (opposite to 30) not in the first and second ends. PNG media_image6.png 775 582 media_image6.png Greyscale Applicant argues “the claim specifies that the "lower rail [is] located directly below the top rail as the lower rail and top rail extend along a portion of an associated one of the proximal and distal sides." The "bump out [is] formed at an other portion of the associated one of the proximal and distal sides at least in part by the lower rail transitioning from being directly below the top rail to being laterally outboard of the top rail." The bump out thus "define[s] a clearance so as not to interfere with the hatch cover when opened."”; examiner respectfully disagrees and presents that Bennet indeed discloses said lower rail being located directly below the top rail (as shown in annotated drawings of figs. 1 and 4 below) as the lower rail and top rail extend along a portion of an associated one of the proximal and distal sides (see portions of the proximal and distal sides along which the rails extends; annotated fig. 1 below, note that the edges of the proximal and distal sides are still considered a portion of the sides), the bump out being formed at an other portion of the associated one of the proximal and distal sides (see portions of the proximal and distal sides along which the bump outs extends; fig. 1; reproduced below) at least in part by the lower rail transitioning from being directly below the top rail to being laterally outboard of the top rail (see at least portion of the lower rail outboard of top rail in annotated drawings below). Finally, note the annotated drawings below discloses “lower rail directly below the top rail”. PNG media_image2.png 542 767 media_image2.png Greyscale Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 SHIREF M MEKHAEIL whose telephone number is (571)270-5334. The examiner can normally be reached 10-7 Mon-Fri. 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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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. /S.M.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3634 /DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 28, 2020
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Sep 23, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Jul 14, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Dec 16, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 04, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12553285
LADDERS, FOOT MECHANISMS FOR LADDERS, AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12552655
SCISSOR LIFT DESCENT CONTROL SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12529263
LADDERS AND LADDER RUNGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12523095
LADDERS AND LADDER BRACING
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12509895
COMBINATION STEP BOLT AND FALL PROTECTION ANCHORAGE ASSEMBLIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+64.9%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 580 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