Office Action Predictor
Application No. 17/690,196

LOCK ASSEMBLY

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 09, 2022
Examiner
WATSON, PETER HUCKLEBERRY
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Qub LLC
OA Round
6 (Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

54%
Career Allow Rate
89 granted / 164 resolved
Without
With
+37.0%
Interview Lift
avg trend
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
52 pending
216
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
41.7%
+1.7% vs TC avg
§102
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
§112
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

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, these amendments are new matter. Claim Objections The previous claim objections are overcome by the present amendments. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claims 1, 3-14, 16-17, 19-30 are 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 claims 1 and 14 “putting the lead screw in tension relative to only the first end plate and not the second end plate” and “relative to only the second end plate and not the first end plate in the second direction” is new matter. To best explain, the examiner notes paragraph 41 of the specification has the closest support, however the support is insufficient. The paragraph does not exclude the possibility the lead screw applies tension to both end plates during both operations. Thus, exclusionary elements such as “only” and “not” lack support in the original disclosure. Claims 3-13, 16-17, 19-30 are rejected due to their dependency on the rejected claims above. 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

Mar 09, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 02, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 07, 2024
Response Filed
Apr 15, 2024
Final Rejection — §112
Jun 19, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 20, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 22, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 24, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 19, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 29, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 29, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 03, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 11, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
May 01, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 01, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 18, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Nov 03, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 14, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Jan 27, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 27, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 19, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 19, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 31, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12595679
LOCKSET ASSEMBLY AND INSTALLATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577811
ELECTRONIC LOCK ASSEMBLY AND METHOD OF INSTALLING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12546152
SECURITY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12540494
CLOSURE LATCH ASSEMBLY WITH CRASH UNLOCK MECHANISM USING SINGLE ELECTRIC MOTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12540492
ELECTRIC LOCK DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate 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
54%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+37.0%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 164 resolved cases by this examiner