Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/238,699

ROTARY BLADE ASSEMBLY FOR CUTTING A FOOD PRODUCT INTO HELICAL STRIPS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 23, 2021
Examiner
DONG, LIANG
Art Unit
3724
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Mccain Foods Limited
OA Round
11 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
11-12
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
250 granted / 480 resolved
-17.9% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+32.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
68 currently pending
Career history
548
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
51.6%
+11.6% vs TC avg
§102
21.0%
-19.0% vs TC avg
§112
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 480 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Response to Amendment The Amendment filed 12/22/2025 has been entered. Claims 21-23, 28 and 30-33 remain pending in the application. Claims 1-20, 24-27, 29 and 34-40 were cancelled. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/22/2025 has been entered. 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 21-23, 28 and 30-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dube (US 5992287) in view of Steko (DE 3708265 A1), Alpma (DE 2406616 A1), Ekstroem (US 20130270378 A1), Julian (US 5042342). Regarding claim 21, Dube teaches rotary blade assembly for cutting a food product into helical strips, the rotary blade assembly comprising: a spiral-shaped blade holder extending at least one rotation around an axis of rotation (axis of 27, see Figure 1) for mounting in a food product flow path (see Figure 1), the blade holder comprising: an upstream edge (edge of 25) and a downstream edge (top edge of 24), the upstream edge being axially spaced apart from the downstream edge to define a radial slot (space between 24 and 25, see Figure 2), an upstream surface (top surface) and a downstream surface (bottom surface)opposite the upstream surface, each of the upstream and downstream surfaces extending from the upstream edge to the downstream edge (See Figures 1-2), a radial cutting edge (25) adjacent to the radial slot (see Figure 1), at least one axial aperture extending through the blade holder (23, see Figure 1); and a plurality of slitter blades removably connected to the blade holder (33a-e, removably see Figure 1), each slitter blade including a slitter cutting edge (edge of 33a-e), wherein the plurality of slitter blades includes a first slitter blade (see Figure 1). Dube fails to teach each sitter blade directly contacting the upstream surface at the downstream edge and the downstream surface at the upstream edge, and the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade forms a closed shape and at least a portion of the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade extends non-perpendicularly to the upstream surface toward or away from the axis of rotation, a mounting fixture removably connected to the blade holder, the mounting fixture comprising an upstream portion contacting the upstream surface of the blade holder and a downstream portion contacting the downstream portion of the blade holder. Steko teaches a tool for cutting helical strip (see Figure 2) comprising an axis of rotation (axis of 10), a plurality of slitter blades (each close shape blades 5 and 19, see Figure 7), each slitter blade including a slitter cutting edge (the edge of the entire shape of the blades 5 and 19), wherein the plurality of slitter blades includes a first slitter blade (5) and the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade forms a closed shape (see Figure 7), at least a portion of the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade extends non-perpendicularly to the upstream surface toward or away from the axis of rotation (the portion of the angle portion of the circle that extends between 0 to 90 degrees of the circle shape, the top and bottom edge of the square shape and the left and right angled portion of the hexagonal shape, all meets the claimed limitation of at least a portion of the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade extends non-perpendicularly to the upstream surface toward or away from the axis of rotation). As one of ordinary skill in the art understand changing the shape of the blade in helical stripe cutting art will change the cross section of the helical stripe being cut out. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Alpma to change the shape of the plurality into any shape including a closed shape, as taught by Steko, in order to get the desired cross section of the end user, such as the circle, square and hexagonal shape. Since a change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. The resulting device of modified Dube teaches the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade forms a closed shape (closed circle, square and hexagonal shape based on the desire shape of the end user) and at least a portion of the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade extends non-perpendicularly to the upstream surface toward or away from the axis of rotation (as modified by Steko, into the closed circle, square and hexagonal shape, the portion of the angle portion of the circle that extends between 0 to 90 degrees of the circle shape, the top and bottom edge of the square shape and the left and right angled portion of the hexagonal shape, all meets the claimed limitation of at least a portion of the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade extends non-perpendicularly to the upstream surface toward or away from the axis of rotation). Alpma teaches a rotary blade assembly a plurality of slitter blades (59) connected to the blade holder (see Figure 4), each slitter blade directly contacting the upstream surface at the downstream edge and the downstream surface at the upstream edge, each slitter blade including a slitter cutting edge (connected at the ends of 47, between the ends, see Figure 4 paragraph 0052 of translation). Ekstrom teaches a rotary blade with removable a plurality of slitter blades (11) that uses slots (20) on upper edge for stabilize the blades (see Figure 9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dube to change the removable holder arrangement, as taught by Ekstrom, in order to better stabilized the slitter blades (paragraph 0046 of Ekstrom). The resulting device of modified Dube teaches each slitter blade directly contacting the upstream surface at the downstream edge (see Figure 9 of Ekstrom). It would also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dube to have both the upper and low portion of the slitter blades to be in contact with the upstream surface at the downstream edge and the downstream surface at the upstream edge, as taught by Almpa, for the same reason of stabilized the slitter blades (paragraph 0046 of Ekstrom). The resulting device of modified Dube teaches each slitter blade directly contacting the upstream surface at the downstream edge (see Figure 9 of Ekstrom) and the downstream surface at the upstream edge (same way as the upper blade part), each slitter blade including a slitter cutting edge (connected at the ends of 47, between the ends, see Figure 4 paragraph 0052 of translation of Alpma). Julian teaches a spiral blade holder (190) with a mounting fixture (312) removably connected to the blade holder (col. 10 lines 13-32), the mounting fixture comprising an upstream portion contacting the upstream surface of the blade holder and a downstream portion contacting the downstream portion of the blade holder (see Figures 14-16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dube to add the mounting fixture, as taught by Julian. As one of ordinary skill in the art understand that the mounting fixture of Julian can further enhance the strength of the holder. Regarding claim 22, modified Dube further teaches the slitter cutting edge of each of the plurality of slitter blades form a closed shape (as modified in claim 21, see shape of 19 in Figure 7 of Steko). Regarding claim 23, modified Dube further teaches at least one of the slitter blades of the plurality of slitter blades (as modified in claim 21, considered as the same as the first slitter blade 5 of Steko) is in contact with an adjacent other slitter blade (as modified in claim 21, 19 of Steko) of the plurality of slitter blades (as modified in claim 21, see Figure 7 of Steko). Regarding claim 28, modified Dube further teaches each of the plurality of slitter blades is positioned at a different radial distance from the axis of rotation (see Figure 4 of Alpma and Figure 1 of Dube). Regarding claim 30, Dube teaches rotary blade assembly for cutting a food product into helical strips, the rotary blade assembly comprising: a blade holder extending at least one rotation around an axis of rotation (axis of 27, see Figure 1), at least one axial aperture extending through the blade holder (23, see Figure 1); an upstream surface (top surface) and a downstream surface (bottom surface)opposite the upstream surface, an upstream edge (edge of 25) and a downstream edge (top edge of 24), and a radially extending leading edge spaced from at least a portion of the upstream surface to define a slot having an axial height and a radial width (space between 24 and 25, see Figure 2), wherein each of the upstream and downstream surfaces extending from the upstream edge to the downstream edge (See Figures 1-2), a radial cutting edge (25) adjacent to the radial slot (see Figure 1), a plurality of slitter blades removably connected to the blade holder (33a-e, removably see Figure 1), each slitter blade including a slitter cutting edge (edge of 33a-e), wherein the plurality of slitter blades includes a first slitter blade (see Figure 1). Dube fails to teach each sitter blade directly contacting the upstream surface at the downstream edge and the downstream surface at the upstream edge, and the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade forms a closed shape and at least a portion of the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade extends non-perpendicularly to the upstream surface toward or away from the axis of rotation, a mounting fixture removably connected to the blade holder, the mounting fixture comprising an upstream portion contacting the upstream surface of the blade holder and a downstream portion contacting the downstream portion of the blade holder. Steko teaches a tool for cutting helical strip (see Figure 2) comprising an axis of rotation (axis of 10), a plurality of slitter blades (each close shape blades 5 and 19, see Figure 7), each slitter blade including a slitter cutting edge (the edge of the entire shape of the blades 5 and 19), wherein the plurality of slitter blades includes a first slitter blade (5) and the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade forms a closed shape (see Figure 7), at least a portion of the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade extends non-perpendicularly to the upstream surface toward or away from the axis of rotation (the portion of the angle portion of the circle that extends between 0 to 90 degrees of the circle shape, the top and bottom edge of the square shape and the left and right angled portion of the hexagonal shape, all meets the claimed limitation of at least a portion of the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade extends non-perpendicularly to the upstream surface toward or away from the axis of rotation). As one of ordinary skill in the art understand changing the shape of the blade in helical stripe cutting art will change the cross section of the helical stripe being cut out. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Alpma to change the shape of the plurality into any shape including a closed shape, as taught by Steko, in order to get the desired cross section of the end user, such as the circle, square and hexagonal shape. Since a change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. The resulting device of modified Dube teaches the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade forms a closed shape (closed circle, square and hexagonal shape based on the desire shape of the end user) and at least a portion of the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade extends non-perpendicularly to the upstream surface toward or away from the axis of rotation (as modified by Steko, into the closed circle, square and hexagonal shape, the portion of the angle portion of the circle that extends between 0 to 90 degrees of the circle shape, the top and bottom edge of the square shape and the left and right angled portion of the hexagonal shape, all meets the claimed limitation of at least a portion of the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade extends non-perpendicularly to the upstream surface toward or away from the axis of rotation). Alpma teaches a rotary blade assembly a plurality of slitter blades (59) connected to the blade holder (see Figure 4), each slitter blade directly contacting the upstream surface at the downstream edge and the downstream surface at the upstream edge, each slitter blade including a slitter cutting edge (connected at the ends of 47, between the ends, see Figure 4 paragraph 0052 of translation). Ekstrom teaches a rotary blade with removable a plurality of slitter blades (11) that uses slots (20) on upper edge for stabilize the blades (see Figure 9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dube to change the removable holder arrangement, as taught by Ekstrom, in order to better stabilized the slitter blades (paragraph 0046 of Ekstrom). The resulting device of modified Dube teaches each slitter blade directly contacting the upstream surface at the downstream edge (see Figure 9 of Ekstrom). It would also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dube to have both the upper and low portion of the slitter blades to be in contact with the upstream surface at the downstream edge and the downstream surface at the upstream edge, as taught by Almpa, for the same reason of stabilized the slitter blades (paragraph 0046 of Ekstrom). The resulting device of modified Dube teaches each slitter blade directly contacting the upstream surface at the downstream edge (see Figure 9 of Ekstrom) and the downstream surface at the upstream edge (same way as the upper blade part), each slitter blade including a slitter cutting edge (connected at the ends of 47, between the ends, see Figure 4 paragraph 0052 of translation of Alpma). Julian teaches a spiral blade holder (190) with a mounting fixture (312) removably connected to the blade holder (col. 10 lines 13-32), the mounting fixture comprising an upstream portion contacting the upstream surface of the blade holder and a downstream portion contacting the downstream portion of the blade holder (see Figures 14-16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of modified Dube to add the mounting fixture, as taught by Julian. As one of ordinary skill in the art understand that the mounting fixture of Julian can further enhance the strength of the holder. Regarding claim 31, modified Dube further teaches the slitter cutting edge of each of the plurality of slitter blades form a closed shape (as modified in claim 30, see shape of 19 in Figure 7 of Steko). Regarding claim 32, modified Dube further teaches at least one of the slitter blades of the plurality of slitter blades (as modified in claim 30, considered as the same as the first slitter blade 5) is in contact with an adjacent other slitter blade (as modified in claim 30, 19 of Steko) of the plurality of slitter blades (as modified in claim 30, see Figure 7 of Steko). Regarding claim 33, modified Dube further teaches the slitter cutting edge of the first slitter blade includes a portion that is curved (as modified in claim 30, see curved portion in Figure 7 of Steko). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21-23, 28 and 30-33 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIANG DONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0479. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 AM-6 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, Ashley Boyer can be reached on 571-272-4502. 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. /LIANG DONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 3/10/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 23, 2021
Application Filed
May 07, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
May 19, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 15, 2022
Response Filed
Dec 12, 2022
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 11, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 01, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 03, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 10, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 16, 2023
Response Filed
Aug 10, 2023
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 08, 2023
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 08, 2023
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 05, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 07, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 14, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 18, 2024
Response Filed
May 01, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Jul 03, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 17, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 01, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 05, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 16, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 20, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 01, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 05, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 24, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 22, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 13, 2026
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 12600053
CUTTING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600048
AUTOMATICALLY RETRACTING SCRAPER WITH BLADE STOP
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589513
MACHINE FOR CUTTING DECORATIONS FOR FRUSTOCONICAL BODIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589522
FLOOR CUTTING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12563996
HOLDING DEVICE FOR AN ASSEMBLY THAT IS TO BE FRACTURED
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

11-12
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+32.2%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 480 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