Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 17/801,616

HARNESSES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 23, 2022
Priority
Dec 11, 2020 — GB 2019624.2 +1 more
Examiner
HAWK, NOAH CHANDLER
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Treemagineers Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allowance Rate
960 granted / 1562 resolved
+9.5% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
59 currently pending
Career history
1625
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
42.4%
+2.4% vs TC avg
§102
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
§112
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1562 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/26/2026 has been entered. Drawings The drawings were received on 5/26/2026. These drawings are accepted. 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. Claims 1-7, 9, 10, 13-15, 17, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miller in US Publication 2004/0058598 in view of Rosenblum in US Patent 3424134. Regarding Claim 1, Miller teaches a structural assembly configured for use in construction of a waist band of a harness, the structural assembly comprising: two primary load-bearing elements (30/34) of elongate, flexible textile webbing (see Paragraph 0034); a semi-loadbearing flexible substrate sheet (6) comprising a plurality of apertures (22/24/26/28) therethrough; and a restraint system (80), wherein each of the two primary load-bearing elements is configured to pass through the apertures in the sheet to form a woven structure with the sheet (see Fig. 2), wherein lengths of the two primary load-bearing elements extend from a center line of the sheet upon one another and form a structure having three or more layers including the sheet (see Fig. 2). Miller is silent on the details of the restraint system. Rosenblum teaches a restraint system (92) including a base (91) including a plurality of webbing slots (on either side of crossbar 91, see Fig. 7), one of two primary load-bearing elements (16) being disposed on the other of two primary load-bearing elements (17) through each of the plurality of webbing slots. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Miller by using a restraint system as taught by Rosenblum in order to better secure the device. Regarding Claim 2, Miller, as modified, teaches that one or both of the primary load-bearing elements is formed as a loop (see Figs. 1-2). Regarding Claim 3, Miller, as modified, teaches that end portions of the or each load- bearing member that are formed as a loop are connected together (such as at 60/64). Regarding Claim 4, Miller, as modified, teaches a plurality of securing elements (opposite ends of 32) of elongate flexible textile webbing connected to one of the primary load-bearing elements, the securing elements including releasable buckle components (74a/b) that allow the securing elements to be interconnected whereby the structural assembly is formed into a loop. Regarding Claim 5, Miller, as modified, teaches that Miller, as modified, teaches that the securing elements are formed from two lengths (the outer ends of 32) of elongate flexible textile webbing connected to the one primary load-bearing element at locations spaced from the center line. Regarding Claim 6, Miller, as modified, teaches that the securing elements are formed from a single length of elongate flexible textile webbing (32) connected to the one primary load-bearing element and which extends across the center line in contact with the one primary load- bearing element. Regarding Claim 7, Miller, as modified, teaches (see Rosenblum) that one or both of the primary load-bearing elements pass through the restraint system (Rosenblum, Fig. 7), the restraint system having formations (Rosenblum elements 91 and 94) to maintain the primary load-bearing elements in position one upon the other . Regarding Claim 9, Miller, as modified, teaches (see Rosenblum) that the restraint system includes an attachment component (the loop of 92) to which a connector can be applied to secure the structural assembly to an external component. Regarding Claim 10, Miller, as modified, teaches that the base is disposed between the attachment component and a substrate sheet (Rosenblum, element 100). Regarding Claim 13, Miller, as modified, teaches one or more hardware assemblies (4/8) secured to the semi-loadbearing flexible substrate sheet by the primary load-bearing elements. Regarding Claim 14, Miller, as modified, teaches that the hardware assemblies include side attachment arrangements (the faces of 4 and 8), each of the side attachment arrangements including a load-bearing component (such as 75a/b) secured to the substrate sheet by one of the primary load- bearing elements Regarding Claim 15, Miller, as modified, teaches a harness comprising: a waist belt including the structural assembly of claim 1. Regarding Claim 17, Miller, as modified, teaches two leg loops 40/50) configured to surround thighs of a user and connected by flexible risers (46a/56a) to hardware components of the structural assembly through forward connection arrangements of the harness. Regarding Claim 27, Miller, as modified, teaches that the webbing slots are parallel to one another (22 and 28 are parallel, as are 24 and 26). Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miller, as modified, as applied to Claim 15 above in view of Stibilj in US Publication 2017/0216635. Miller, as modified, is silent on the use of padding. Stibilj teaches a harness including a substrate (40) with padding (42) secured to an inner surface of the substrate sheet to be disposed, in use, between the substrate sheet and a user's body. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Miller, as modified, by adding padding as taught bs Stibilj in order to provide a more comfortable harness for the user. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 5/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and its dependent claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 23-26 are allowed. Claims 8, 11, 12, 18-22, and 28 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH C. HAWK whose telephone number is (571)272-1480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5:30pm. 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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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. NOAH C. HAWK Primary Examiner Art Unit 3636 /Noah C. Hawk/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 4 earlier events
Jan 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 23, 2026
Notice of Allowance
Jan 29, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 07, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 07, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 26, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
May 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12703992
SUN SHADING SYSTEMS
3y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12702206
PORTABLE SUSPENDED INVERTED UMBRELLA WITH QUICK RELEASE FABRIC
3y 4m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12691026
CONVENIENTLY STORED WALKING AID
2y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12680331
CARBON FIBER ROOFTOP TENT
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12677916
Electric Umbrella
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+22.2%)
1y 11m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1562 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