Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 28, 2026
Application No. 17/689,147

ELECTRONIC DOOR LOCK

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 08, 2022
Priority
Aug 27, 2021 — TW 110131909
Examiner
WATSON, PETER HUCKLEBERRY
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Tlhm Co. Ltd.
OA Round
6 (Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allowance Rate
94 granted / 173 resolved
+2.3% vs TC avg
Strong +37% interview lift
Without
With
+36.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
221
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
82.3%
+42.3% vs TC avg
§102
12.1%
-27.9% vs TC avg
§112
5.6%
-34.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 173 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Response to Arguments The examiner agrees the amendments overcome the prior art however new claim 11 raises new matter issues. Drawings The previous drawing objections are overcome by the present amendments. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) The previous 112(a) rejections are overcome by the present amendments however new issues have arisen. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. In regards to claim 11, the combination of both the “buffer” and the “transmission base” is new matter. Both of these features exist separately in different embodiments but not together. Furthermore, the specification does not reasonably convey that the inventors had possession of both in the same embodiment. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) The previous 112(b) rejections are overcome by the present amendments Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-5 and 8-10 allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not teach or fairly suggest electronic door lock as claimed in independent claim 1 of the instant application. The examiner can find no motivation to combine or modify the references of record without the use of impermissible hindsight. Regarding claim 1, the prior art of record, including Liang (TW M404254 U) and Menta (US 20060021404 A1), teaches electronic door locks having much of the claimed structure, but fails to teach each and every limitation of the claims. Specifically, the prior art fails to teach the elastic body is a torsion spring, and the buffer is a torsion spring, in addition to the other claimed structure and functionality. One of ordinary skill in the art would not find it obvious to modify the structure and functionality of the elastic body of the prior art to be configured and to function as claimed in the instant application without the use of hindsight and/or destroying the references. Therefore, the prior art does not disclose the electronic door lock of claim 1. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” 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 PETER H WATSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5393. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 - 5. 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, Christine M Mills can be reached at (571) 272-8322. 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. /PETER H WATSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3675 /CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 8 earlier events
Apr 30, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jul 30, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 01, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Dec 05, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 05, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Apr 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
May 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12631059
LOCKING DEVICE AND LOCKING SYSTEM
2y 7m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12624571
ELECTRIFIED LATCH
4y 2m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12612221
CLOSURE MECHANISM WITH LOCKING DEVICE FOR STERILE CONTAINERS, AND STERILE CONTAINER COMPRISING SAME
3y 6m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12612805
TUBULAR LATCH MECHANISM
2y 2m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12607363
AUTO-OPEN DOOR-LOCK EQUIPMENT
2y 4m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+36.7%)
3y 2m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 173 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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