Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/724,577

PRECISION DETECTION DEVICE FOR FORCE STANDARD MACHINE, FORCE VALUE COMPARISON MACHINE AND PRECISION DETECTION METHOD FOR FORCE STANDARD MACHINE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Apr 20, 2022
Examiner
DOERRLER, WILLIAM CHARLES
Art Unit
3993
Tech Center
3900
Assignee
Kunshan Innovation Testing Instruments Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
312 granted / 398 resolved
+18.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
422
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
§102
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 398 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Defective Priority Claim The instant application seeks reissue of US Patent No. 11,118,994 B2, which issued from Application No. 16/255,842. The application data sheet (ADS) filed in Application No. 16/255,842 on January 24, 2019 included a foreign priority claim under 35 USC 119(a) to CN 201610608135.5 filed in China on July 29, 2016. In Application No. 16/255,842, there is no paper styled “TRANSMITTAL OF PRIORITY DOCUMENTS”. The certified copy of the priority document which is required is not in the case file. An IDS filed January 24, 2019 includes CN 106017793 A, that appears to the publication of the Chinese application and the WIPO publication WO 2018/019303 A1, the Chinese document that the ‘842 application is a continuation of are in the file, but there is no certified copy. Since the certified copy of CN 201610608135.5 has not been filed in either Application No. 16/255,842 or this reissue application, applicant has failed to comply with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.55 for receiving the benefit of a claim to foreign priority. As explained in MPEP 1402, subsection III and also MPEP 1417, reissue is available to correct an error in failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.55 during the pendency of the original application, including the failure to file a certified copy of a foreign priority document. In view of the changes to 37 CFR 1.55 that became effective May 13, 2015, the reissue applicant must also file a petition under 37 CFR 1.55(f) or (g), as appropriate, including a showing of good and sufficient cause for the delay in filing the certified copy. Reissue Applications For reissue applications filed before September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the law and rules in effect on September 15, 2012. Where specifically designated, these are “pre-AIA ” provisions. For reissue applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the current provisions. Application Data Sheet The application Data Sheet (ADS) submitted April 20, 2022 states that this application is a continuation of PCT/CN2017/095075, which it cannot be as the time to file such a continuation has expired. The ADS further fails to state that this application is a reissue of application 16/255,842, now Patent 11,118,994. A corrected ADS should be filed with new information underlined. The new information should include indicating that this application is a reissue of the ‘994 patent, as well as filling in the application number (17/724,577) in the blank spaces that are permissible when the ADS is filed with an application, including on the page headers. As noted above, a petition should be filed to permit the late filing of the certified copy of the priority document. Applicant should also file a request for corrected filing receipt with the new ADS to ensure the changes have been made correctly. Specification 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, requires the specification to be written in “full, clear, concise, and exact terms.” The specification is replete with terms which are not clear, concise and exact. The specification should be revised carefully in order to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112. Examples of some unclear, inexact or verbose terms used in the specification are: In the description of the embodiments beginning on line 29 of column 7 of the patent, scientific terms are used in a manner contrary to their usual scientific meaning. For example, beginning on line 32, “Gravity F1 corresponding to weight of it is loaded on the first piston 10 and the value obtained on the second measurement device 18 is F2=1000 txg, wherein gravity G =mxg, m is the weight, g is a proportionality coefficient, and g may be 9.8 N/kg.” Gravity in this example (as well as the other examples) appears to be describing what is generally referred to as weight (or force) and the term “weight” is describing what is generally referred to as mass. “Gravity” in the description of both embodiments should be changed to --weight-- and “weight” should be changed to --mass--. All amendments made in a reissue proceeding should be made in accordance with 37 C.F.R. 1.173. See MPEP 1453. Specifically in the specification, the entire text of a rewritten paragraph including single brackets for deletions and underlining for additions relative to the patent text is to be submitted. For example: Change the paragraph beginning on line 37 of column 7 to read: Based on this, [gravity] weight corresponding to [weight] mass of 1kg is loaded on the first piston 10, and then, the value obtained on the second measurement device 18 does not fluctuate. 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 1-10 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. Claim 1 claims a first liquid medium in the first hydraulic cylinder and a second liquid medium in the second hydraulic cylinder. The pipeline “is communicated with the first liquid medium in the first hydraulic cylinder (2) and a second end of the pipeline (6) is communicated with the second liquid medium in the second hydraulic cylinder (14)”. It is unclear what differentiates the first liquid medium from the second liquid medium. It appears that there is only one liquid medium that is found in the pipeline, the first hydraulic cylinder and the second hydraulic cylinder. The last indent of claim 1, “a precision of the second measurement device (18) is configured to be calculated based on area ratio of the first and second piston (10), (16), the value of the second acting force F2, and the value of the third acting force Fn” is meaningless in an apparatus claim. It imparts no structure. Is the calculation performed by a user using the values determined? No structure to perform the calculation has been claimed. Any additional structure added to the claim must have support in the original specification. Claim 8 requires a fluid connection between the first and second piston to have any association between the claimed forces. The fluid connection should be claimed for operability of the method. In line 11 of claim 8 (as found in the ‘994 patent), “ration” should be changed to “ratio”. The remaining claims depend from claim 1 or 8 so they are rejected due to their dependency. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-4,6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent No. 4,722,407 to Gindy et al. (hereinafter “Gindy”). Gindy discloses in figure 3 a force value comparison machine (140) comprising a precision detection device, a to-be detected force standard machine, and a pipeline (equivalent to 8 in figure 1), wherein the precision detection device comprises a first hydraulic cylinder (48) and a first piston (67 and 74), wherein a first liquid medium is disposed in the first hydraulic cylinder and an end surface of the first piston contacts the liquid medium in the first hydraulic cylinder. The to-be-detected force standard machine comprises a second hydraulic cylinder (50), a second piston (58 and 60) and a second measurement device (load cell 2 shown in figure 1and 44 shown in figure 2), wherein liquid medium is disposed in the second hydraulic cylinder. The first end of the pipeline communicates with the fluid in the first hydraulic cylinder and a second end of the pipeline communicates with the fluid second hydraulic cylinder (seen in figures 1-3). The end surface of the second piston contacts the fluid in the second hydraulic cylinder (seen in the figures). Gindy discusses, beginning on line 61 of column 2, adding weight to the top of the first piston to change the force determined by the measuring device associated with the second piston. See particularly the sentence beginning on line 32 of column 3, “Since chambers 4,6 and 8 are filled with fluid 9, placing deadweights 16 upon member 12 causes member 12 to move downwardly and pressurize fluid 9 which is transferred through chamber 8 to chamber 6 and which causes member 20 to move upwardly and apply force F to load cell 2.” The force produced by adding the additional weight is F3 in the claim and F2 is the force determined at load cell 2. In regard to claim 2, the paragraph beginning on line 47 of column 4 discusses using the area difference of the pistons to derive a force multiplier on the load cell. In regard to claim 3, 16 records the number of standard weights added to the top of the first piston to provide the downward force. In regard to claim 4, the paragraph beginning on line 47 of column 4 teaches the determination of force using the input force and the area ratio of the two cylinders. Algebraic substitution allows for changing the unknown variable using the same equation found in line 53 of column 3. In regard to claim 6, weight is added to 16 to compress the fluid as discussed in the paragraph beginning on line 32 of column 3. In regard to claim 7, the passageway 8 must be hollow to permit the fluid described. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 4,722,407 to Gindy et al. (hereinafter “Gindy”) in view of US Pre-Grant Publication 2011/0146417 to Sheeks (hereinafter “Sheeks”). As discussed above, Gindy teaches a device the utilizes cylinders of different area to enable force multiplication in the calibrating of load cells. Gindy uses seals between the cylinder walls and the moving pistons. Sheeks shows a portable hydraulic force readout apparatus with piston 1 moving in cylinder 3 under a load F to compress the fluid on the opposite side of the piston. This forms a closed space between a side surface of the piston and the inner wall of the cylinder. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicants’ invention from the teaching of Sheeks to modify the force determining apparatus of Gindy by forming a closed space between the piston and cylinder to simplify the machine and avoid calculations concerned with the movement of seals. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM C DOERRLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4807. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-5. 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, Patricia Engle can be reached at (571) 272-6660. 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. /WILLIAM C DOERRLER/ Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993 Conferees: /Laura Davison/ Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993 /Patricia L Engle/ SPRS, Art Unit 3993
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 20, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 29, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent RE50847
METHOD OF INSTALLING A MULTI-BOWL WELLHEAD ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590718
Air conditioning systems for rooms
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent RE50828
DRIVING-SIDE PULLEY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent RE50827
ONE TRIP LOCKDOWN SLEEVE AND RUNNING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571574
ICE MAKER AND REFRIGERATOR INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+12.8%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 398 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