Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/627,652

DEVICE TRANSPORT BY AIR

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Jan 15, 2022
Examiner
WANG, MICHAEL H
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
5 (Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
6-7
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
77%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
347 granted / 674 resolved
-0.5% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
725
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
54.1%
+14.1% vs TC avg
§102
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
§112
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 674 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §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 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9/17/2025 has been entered. Notice to Applicant Claims 17-32 have been examined in this application. This communication is a final rejection in response to the “Amendments to the claims” and “Remarks” filed 9/17/2025. Drawings INFORMATION ON HOW TO EFFECT DRAWING CHANGES Replacement Drawing Sheets Drawing changes must be made by presenting replacement sheets which incorporate the desired changes and which comply with 37 CFR 1.84. An explanation of the changes made must be presented either in the drawing amendments section, or remarks, section of the amendment paper. 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). A replacement sheet must 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 the amended drawing(s) must not be labeled as “amended.” If the changes to the drawing figure(s) are not accepted by the examiner, applicant will be notified of any required corrective action in the next Office action. No further drawing submission will be required, unless applicant is notified. Identifying indicia, if provided, should include the title of the invention, inventor’s name, and application number, or docket number (if any) if an application number has not been assigned to the application. If this information is provided, it must be placed on the front of each sheet and within the top margin. Annotated Drawing Sheets A marked-up copy of any amended drawing figure, including annotations indicating the changes made, may be submitted or required by the examiner. The annotated drawing sheet(s) must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheet” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. Timing of Corrections Applicant is required to submit acceptable corrected drawings within the time period set in the Office action. See 37 CFR 1.85(a). Failure to take corrective action within the set period will result in ABANDONMENT of the application. If corrected drawings are required in a Notice of Allowability (PTOL-37), the new drawings MUST be filed within the THREE MONTH shortened statutory period set for reply in the “Notice of Allowability.” Extensions of time may NOT be obtained under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136 for filing the corrected drawings after the mailing of a Notice of Allowability. The drawings are objected to because they appear to be the exact same Figures 2 and 4 submitted 2/27/2025, and no explanation of changes made has been provided. If applicant is attempting to amend the drawings, Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. 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. 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. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The substitute specification filed 9/17/2025 has not been entered because it does not conform to 37 CFR 1.125(b) and (c) because: a marked-up copy of the substitute specification has not been supplied (in addition to the clean copy). Claim Objections Claims 17-32 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims are labeled as (New), but should be labeled as (Currently Amended), as there was already a version of claims 17-32 previous submitted. The claims also do not show what has been amended from the previous version of the claims. As best as the examiner can tell, the claims appear to be identical to the previous version of the claims filed 10/25/2024. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 17-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claim 17, the limitation “also carrying out another transport” renders the claim indefinite because “carrying out” typically refers to a step, so it is unclear if this is another physical transport vehicle, or a transport step, and further if it is a physical transport vehicle, it is unclear what distinguishes this vehicle from the previously claimed aircraft flight devices. Regarding claims 18-32, the claims are indefinite because they are all dependent on canceled claims. It is thus unclear what exactly the scope of these claims are. These claims have therefore not been further examined on their merits. 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. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Number 2006/0208136 by Cook in view of US Patent Number 3,011,742 to Gross. Regarding claim 17, Cook, as bets understood, discloses an air transport device comprising: the fact that, in the space of the atmosphere of a planet (paragraph 5 discloses “tows an intended space load close to the stratosphere”) a flight is being formed simultaneously with other minimum of 3 aircraft flight devices (Figure 1E shows 3 towing aircraft and 1 towed aircraft), towards and from the outer space of dense atmospheres (paragraph 100 discloses “a space launch method”), suitable for space flight devices with aerodynamic load that are connected to each other to feed each other (claim 2 discloses “A method of transferring oxidizer in liquid form or other fuels from an aircraft or an attached towable structure to a space vehicle using centripetal force, comprising: a hose, pipe, or flexible tube of sufficient internal diameter and of up to tens of kilometers in length”) by conical hoses, also carrying out another transport (see Figures 1A-1F). Cook, as best understood, does not disclose the space flight devices being connected to each other to feed each other by conical hoses. However, this limitation is taught by Gross. Gross discloses an aircraft refueling and tow line 28 having a conical hose supply 21 with a larger base (see Figures 5 and 6) as a counter weight, with a house and drogue funnel (Gross describes the drogue throughout the disclosure), and column 1, lines 31-39 further teaches the use of booms for this refueling connection. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Cook using the teachings from Gross to use known types of refueling lines for aircraft. Response to Arguments Applicant should submit an argument under the heading “Remarks” pointing out disagreements with the examiner’s contentions. Applicant must also discuss the references applied against the claims, explaining how the claims avoid the references or distinguish from them. Conclusion All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 MICHAEL H WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6554. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6:30. 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, Josh Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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. MICHAEL H. WANG Primary Examiner Art Unit 3642 /MICHAEL H WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 15, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 06, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Feb 12, 2024
Response Filed
Apr 20, 2024
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Oct 25, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 28, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 23, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Feb 27, 2025
Response Filed
May 31, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Sep 17, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582570
FAST-CONNECTED LABORATORY ANIMAL TEST BENCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582092
Automated Pet Food Bowl
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12543696
MILKING SYSTEM WITH CENTRAL UTILITY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12527509
Device and method for recording biopotentials in laboratory animals
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12522370
ROTORCRAFT POWERPLANT COOLING SYSTEM
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

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
77%
With Interview (+25.6%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 674 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