Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/358,750

RECYCLABLE AND DISPENSABLE CUTLERY UTENSIL

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 25, 2021
Examiner
AYALA, FERNANDO A
Art Unit
3724
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Waddington North America Inc.
OA Round
7 (Non-Final)
53%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 53% of resolved cases
53%
Career Allow Rate
250 granted / 469 resolved
-16.7% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
63 currently pending
Career history
532
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
47.8%
+7.8% vs TC avg
§102
23.6%
-16.4% vs TC avg
§112
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 469 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. DETAILED ACTION 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1-14-26 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 of this title, 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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USD706586, Kestenbaum in view of US D667708, Stewart. Regarding Claim 1, Kestenbaum discloses a disposable cutlery article compatible for dispensing by a no-touch utensil dispenser from a vertical stack of identical cutlery articles that are mutually aligned and identically oriented, said dispensing including inserting of an escapement finger between ends of adjacent handles in the stack, the plastic cutlery article comprising (since, as shown in fig 4 and 5, the cutlery article is stackable on an identical article, identically oriented, and since there is a space between the articles to allow an escapement finger to enter between the articles in said stack): a handle extending from a proximal end of the handle to a distal end of the handle along a horizontal, longitudinal cutlery axis (see annotated fig 4 below); a head immediately adjacent to and extending from the distal end of the handle substantially along said longitudinal axis, the head being configured for contacting and manipulating food (since the utensil is a salad server, and the head portion in such servers is configured to contact salad/food); and PNG media_image1.png 456 920 media_image1.png Greyscale a chamfered surface extending distally from the proximal end of the handle, the chamfered surface being in a plane that is tilted from vertical about a horizontal tilt axis that is transverse to the longitudinal cutlery axis (see annotated fig 4 below); PNG media_image2.png 595 486 media_image2.png Greyscale said cutlery article being configured such that when the said plastic cutlery article is included within the no-touch utensil dispenser in the vertical stack of identical plastic cutlery articles that are mutually aligned and identically oriented (as seen in fig 4, where the articles are mutually aligned and identically oriented, and can be placed in a no-touch dispenser in this configuration/orientation): the chamfered surface extends distally from the proximal end of the handle to an upward-facing boundary of the handle (see annotated fig. 4 below), so that a proximal edge of the chamfered surface is located at the proximal end of the handle and a distal edge of the chamfered surface lies within the upward-facing boundary of the handle (see annotated fig. 4 below); PNG media_image3.png 506 504 media_image3.png Greyscale the handle of the cutlery article rests upon a handle of a next lower cutlery article in the stack (fig 4); the upward-facing boundary of the handle of the cutlery article is separated from an upward-facing boundary of the handle of the next lower cutlery article by a vertical stack spacing (see annotated fig 4 below); and a handle gap is formed between the proximal end of the handle and the proximal end of the next lower cutlery article due to the chamfered surface, (see annotated fig. 4, below). PNG media_image4.png 572 540 media_image4.png Greyscale Kestenbaum lacks Feature I a longitudinal depth of said handle gap being greater than the vertical stack spacing, and Feature II, the material of the utensils being plastic. Regarding feature I: Stewart discloses a cutlery utensil having an elongated handle with a chamfer extending from the proximal end thereof, in the same field of endeavor as the: elongated handle with a chamfer extending from the proximal end thereof, as Kestenbaum, and discloses that in such a utensil a longitudinal depth of a vertical stack spacing/handle gap, e.g. the thickness of the handle, which when stacked would define the space of the upward-facing boundary of the handle of the cutlery article separated from an upward-facing boundary of a handle of a next lower cutlery article by a vertical stack spacing is greater than the vertical stack spacing of the handle, e.g. space formed between the proximal end of the handle and the proximal end of the next lower cutlery article due to the chamfered surface (See annotated fig 7 below). PNG media_image5.png 670 573 media_image5.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 414 887 media_image6.png Greyscale It would have been obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill to modify Kestenbaum by making: the longitudinal depth of said handle gap being greater than the vertical stack spacing, as shown in Stewart, since such a configuration would be equally effective for allowing the utensils to be stacked relative to one another, and since Stewart shows that this design is an alternate design known in the art. The court has held, absent any statement of criticality as to the location of the switch recess, that rearrangement of parts require only ordinary skill in the art and hence are considered routine expedients. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice). Also, it would have been obvious as a matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kestenbaum by making longitudinal depth of said handle gap be greater than the vertical stack spacing, since the changing of a shape of an element of an invention was held to be in the realm of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art, see In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), and MPEP 2144.04-IV.B. Regarding Feature II: Lee discloses a plastic cutlery and tableware apparatus, and discloses in the background of the invention that the one piece tableware thereof in the same field of endeavor as the one piece table ware apparatus of the current invention and discloses that it is beneficial to create the one piece cutlery out of plastic material in order to save material while strengthening the cutlery utensils, per par 0013. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Kestenbaum by making the cutlery out of plastic, in order to save material while strengthening the cutlery utensils as taught by Lee. In addition, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to form the cutlery out of plastic, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Here, an artisan would be motivated to make the utensils out of plastic since it is well known in the material and mechanical arts that plastic is relatively cheaper material and is easy to shape in complex shapes compared to wood, metal and other similar materials. Regarding Claim 2, in Kestenbaum the cutlery article is a spoon (fig 4). Regarding Claim 3, in Kestenbaum the wherein the head is wider than the handle ( fig 3). Regarding Claim 4, in Kestenbaum the said handle is at least partially hollow. PNG media_image7.png 512 782 media_image7.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 5, Kestenbaum discloses a disposable cutlery article compatible for dispensing by a no-touch utensil dispenser from a vertical stack of identical cutlery articles that are mutually aligned and identically oriented, said dispensing including inserting of an escapement finger between ends of adjacent handles in the stack, the plastic cutlery article comprising (since, as shown in fig 4 and 5, the cutlery article is stackable on an identical article, identically oriented, and since there is a space between the articles to allow an escapement finger to enter between the articles in said stack): a handle extending from a proximal end of the handle to a distal end of the handle along a horizontal, longitudinal cutlery axis (see annotated fig 4 below); PNG media_image1.png 456 920 media_image1.png Greyscale a head immediately adjacent to and extending from the distal end of the handle substantially along said longitudinal axis, (see annotated fig 4 above) the head being configured for contacting and manipulating food (since the utensil is a salad server, and the head portion in such servers is configured to contact salad/food) and wherein the head has an escapement feature in an outer edge for facilitating controlled release from a bottom of a stack of utensils and the escapement feature is in a form of a notch (see annotated fig 1 below); PNG media_image8.png 488 806 media_image8.png Greyscale and a chamfered surface extending distally from the proximal end of the handle, the chamfered surface being in a plane that is tilted from vertical about a horizontal tilt axis that is transverse to the longitudinal cutlery axis (see annotated fig 4 below); PNG media_image2.png 595 486 media_image2.png Greyscale said cutlery article being configured such that when the said cutlery article is included within the no-touch utensil dispenser in the vertical stack of identical cutlery articles that are mutually aligned and identically oriented (as seen in fig 4, where the articles are mutually aligned and identically oriented, and can be placed in a no-touch dispenser in this configuration/orientation): the chamfered surface extends distally from the proximal end of the handle to an upward-facing boundary of the handle, so that a proximal edge of the chamfered surface is located at the proximal end of the handle and a distal edge of the chamfered surface lies within the upward-facing boundary of the handle (see annotated fig. 4 below); PNG media_image3.png 506 504 media_image3.png Greyscale the handle of the plastic article rests upon a handle of a next lower cutlery article in the stack (see fig 4); the upward-facing boundary of the handle of the plastic cutlery article is separated from an upward-facing boundary of the handle of the next lower cutlery article by a vertical stack spacing; and a handle gap is formed between the proximal end of the handle and the proximal end of the next lower cutlery article due to the chamfered surface, see annotated fig 4 below. PNG media_image4.png 572 540 media_image4.png Greyscale Kestenbaum lacks Feature I a longitudinal depth of said handle gap being greater than the vertical stack spacing, and Feature II, the material of the utensils being plastic. Regarding feature I: Stewart discloses a cutlery utensil having an elongated handle with a chamfer extending from the proximal end thereof, in the same field of endeavor as the: elongated handle with a chamfer extending from the proximal end thereof, as Kestenbaum, and discloses that in such a utensil a longitudinal depth of a vertical stack spacing/handle gap, e.g. the thickness of the handle, which when stacked would define the space of the upward-facing boundary of the handle of the cutlery article separated from an upward-facing boundary of a handle of a next lower cutlery article by a vertical stack spacing is greater than the vertical stack spacing of the handle, e.g. space formed between the proximal end of the handle and the proximal end of the next lower cutlery article due to the chamfered surface (See annotated fig 7 below). PNG media_image5.png 670 573 media_image5.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 414 887 media_image6.png Greyscale It would have been obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill to modify Kestenbaum by making: the longitudinal depth of said handle gap being greater than the vertical stack spacing, as shown in Stewart, since such a configuration would be equally effective for allowing the utensils to be stacked relative to one another, and since Stewart shows that this design is an alternate design known in the art. The court has held, absent any statement of criticality as to the location of the switch recess, that rearrangement of parts require only ordinary skill in the art and hence are considered routine expedients. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice). Also, it would have been obvious as a matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kestenbaum by making longitudinal depth of said handle gap be greater than the vertical stack spacing, since the changing of a shape of an element of an invention was held to be in the realm of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art, see In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), and MPEP 2144.04-IV.B. Regarding Feature II: Lee discloses a plastic cutlery and tableware apparatus, and discloses in the background of the invention that the one piece tableware thereof in the same field of endeavor as the one piece table ware apparatus of the current invention and discloses that it is beneficial to create the one piece cutlery out of plastic material in order to save material while strengthening the cutlery utensils, per par 0013. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Kestenbaum by making the cutlery out of plastic, in order to save material while strengthening the cutlery utensils as taught by Lee. In addition, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to form the cutlery out of plastic, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Here, an artisan would be motivated to make the utensils out of plastic since it is well known in the material and mechanical arts that plastic is relatively cheaper material and is easy to shape in complex shapes compared to wood, metal and other similar materials. Regarding Claim 6, Kestenbaum discloses a disposable, cutlery article compatible for dispensing by a no-touch utensil dispenser from a vertical stack of identical cutlery articles that are mutually aligned and identically oriented, said dispensing including inserting of an escapement finger between ends of adjacent handles in the stack, the plastic cutlery article (since, as shown in fig 4 and 5, the cutlery article is stackable on an identical article, identically oriented, and since there is a space between the articles to allow an escapement finger to enter between the articles in said stack) comprising: a handle extending from a proximal end of the handle to a distal end of the handle along a horizontal, longitudinal cutlery axis (See annotated fig 4, below); a head immediately adjacent to and extending from the distal end of the handle substantially along said longitudinal axis, (See annotated fig 4, below) the head being configured for contacting and manipulating food (since the utensil is a salad server, and the head portion in such servers is configured to contact salad/food) PNG media_image1.png 456 920 media_image1.png Greyscale and wherein the head has an escapement feature in its outer edge for facilitating controlled release from a bottom of a stack of utensils and the escapement feature is in a form of a predetermined release radius (see annotated fig 1 below, where notch is a predetermined release-radius); PNG media_image8.png 488 806 media_image8.png Greyscale and a chamfered surface extending distally from the proximal end of the handle, the chamfered surface being in a plane that is tilted from vertical about a horizontal tilt axis that is transverse to the longitudinal cutlery axis (see annotated fig 4 below); PNG media_image2.png 595 486 media_image2.png Greyscale said cutlery article being configured such that when the said plastic cutlery article is included within the no-touch utensil dispenser in the vertical stack of identical plastic cutlery articles that are mutually aligned and identically oriented (as seen in fig 4, where the articles are mutually aligned and identically oriented, and can be placed in a no-touch dispenser in this configuration/orientation): the chamfered surface extends distally from the proximal end of the handle to an upward-facing boundary of the handle, so that a proximal edge of the chamfered surface is located at the proximal end of the handle and a distal edge of the chamfered surface lies within the upward-facing boundary of the handle (see annotated fig 4 below); PNG media_image3.png 506 504 media_image3.png Greyscale the handle of the plastic cutlery article rests upon a handle of a next lower cutlery article in the stack (Fig 4); the upward-facing boundary of the handle of the plastic cutlery article is separated from an upward-facing boundary of the handle of the next lower cutlery article by a vertical stack spacing (see annotated fig 4 below); and a handle gap is formed between the proximal end of the handle and the proximal end of the next lower cutlery article due to the chamfered surface (see annotated fig 4 below). PNG media_image4.png 572 540 media_image4.png Greyscale Kestenbaum lacks Feature I a longitudinal depth of said handle gap being greater than the vertical stack spacing, and Feature II, the material of the utensils being plastic. Regarding feature I: Stewart discloses a cutlery utensil having an elongated handle with a chamfer extending from the proximal end thereof, in the same field of endeavor as the: elongated handle with a chamfer extending from the proximal end thereof, as Kestenbaum, and discloses that in such a utensil a longitudinal depth of a vertical stack spacing/handle gap, e.g. the thickness of the handle, which when stacked would define the space of the upward-facing boundary of the handle of the cutlery article separated from an upward-facing boundary of a handle of a next lower cutlery article by a vertical stack spacing is greater than the vertical stack spacing of the handle, e.g. space formed between the proximal end of the handle and the proximal end of the next lower cutlery article due to the chamfered surface (See annotated fig 7 below). PNG media_image5.png 670 573 media_image5.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 414 887 media_image6.png Greyscale It would have been obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill to modify Kestenbaum by making: the longitudinal depth of said handle gap being greater than the vertical stack spacing, as shown in Stewart, since such a configuration would be equally effective for allowing the utensils to be stacked relative to one another, and since Stewart shows that this design is an alternate design known in the art. The court has held, absent any statement of criticality as to the location of the switch recess, that rearrangement of parts require only ordinary skill in the art and hence are considered routine expedients. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice). Also, it would have been obvious as a matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kestenbaum by making longitudinal depth of said handle gap be greater than the vertical stack spacing, since the changing of a shape of an element of an invention was held to be in the realm of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art, see In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), and MPEP 2144.04-IV.B. Regarding Feature II: Lee discloses a plastic cutlery and tableware apparatus, and discloses in the background of the invention that the one piece tableware thereof in the same field of endeavor as the one piece table ware apparatus of the current invention and discloses that it is beneficial to create the one piece cutlery out of plastic material in order to save material while strengthening the cutlery utensils, per par 0013. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Kestenbaum by making the cutlery out of plastic, in order to save material while strengthening the cutlery utensils as taught by Lee. In addition, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to form the cutlery out of plastic, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Here, an artisan would be motivated to make the utensils out of plastic since it is well known in the material and mechanical arts that plastic is relatively cheaper material and is easy to shape in complex shapes compared to wood, metal and other similar materials. Regarding Claim 7, Kestenbaum discloses a: disposable cutlery article comprising: a handle extending from a proximal end of the handle to a distal end of the handle along a horizontal, longitudinal cutlery axis; (see annotated fig 4 below) a head immediately adjacent to and extending from the distal end of the handle substantially along said longitudinal axis (see annotated fig 4 below), the head being configured for contacting and manipulating food; and PNG media_image1.png 456 920 media_image1.png Greyscale a chamfered surface extending distally from the proximal end of the handle, the chamfered surface being in a plane that is tilted from vertical about a horizontal tilt axis that is transverse to the longitudinal cutlery axis (see annotated fig 4 below); PNG media_image9.png 595 482 media_image9.png Greyscale and wherein the disposable cutlery article is in a vertical stack of identical cutlery articles that are mutually aligned and identically oriented in a no-touch utensil dispenser, (as seen in fig 4, where the articles are mutually aligned and identically oriented, and can be placed in a no-touch dispenser in this configuration/orientation) and wherein the chamfered surface of the disposable plastic cutlery article extends distally from the proximal end of the handle to an upward-facing boundary of the handle, so that a proximal edge of the chamfered surface is located at the proximal end of the handle and a distal edge of the chamfered surface lies within the upward-facing boundary of the handle (see annotated fig 4 below); PNG media_image3.png 506 504 media_image3.png Greyscale the handle of the cutlery article rests upon a handle of a next lower cutlery article in the stack (fig 4); the upward-facing boundary of the handle of the cutlery article is separated from an upward-facing boundary of the handle of the next lower cutlery article by a vertical stack spacing; and a handle gap is formed between the proximal end of the handle and the proximal end of the next lower cutlery article due to the chamfered surface, (see annotated fig 4 below). PNG media_image4.png 572 540 media_image4.png Greyscale Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 1/14/26, with respect to the prior art rejections of the claims (as the claims have now been amended) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the prior art rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kestenbaum. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPNs/USPGPUBs 5904250 2752678 20190365127 D202926 20130152406 20170340152 D778120 D675869 9924816 D717112 3030812 4317284 2824369 3030812 disclose 20130152406 D625153 USD706586 D074863 0512162 4317284 D560443 D488394 D667708 D996925 disclose state of the art utensils with chamfers. Thus, each of these references disclose elements relevant to the present invention/application. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FERNANDO A AYALA whose telephone number is (571)270-5336. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm Eastern standard. 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, Boyer Ashley 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. /FERNANDO A AYALA/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 25, 2021
Application Filed
Jul 15, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 18, 2022
Response Filed
Feb 22, 2023
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 13, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 18, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 21, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 26, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
May 22, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 21, 2023
Response Filed
Feb 27, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 04, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 05, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 20, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 24, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 11, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 14, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 17, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583142
PUNCHING STATION AND METHOD FOR A RELIEF PLATE PRECURSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12533737
Method for Manufacturing a Rotatable Tool Body to Minimize Cutting Insert Runout, a Tool Body Produced Therefrom, and a Method of Using Such a Tool Body
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12527262
Hedge Trimmer
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12521804
MOBILE HANDHELD SAWING MACHINE HAVING A SCORING TOOL ON A LONGITUDINAL SIDE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12521807
Sawing Tool
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 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

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
53%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+26.3%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 469 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