Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/809,095

SNOW PLOW AND MOUNT ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 27, 2022
Examiner
MCGOWAN, JAMIE LOUISE
Art Unit
3671
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Douglas Dynamics L L C
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
705 granted / 961 resolved
+21.4% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
998
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.3%
+9.3% vs TC avg
§102
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§112
14.2%
-25.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 961 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 . 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 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. 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 69-90 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barker et al. (9,869,067) in view of Fey (2018/0238015) and Harris (2008/0073090). Regarding claims 69, 76, 82 and 89, Barker discloses a snow plow mount assembly and method of use comprising: A mount frame (30) adapted to be secured to a vehicle A snow plow frame (20) having an a-frame (22) and a lift frame (24) pivotally connected relative to one another about a transverse horizontal axis A plow blade pivotally connected relative to the a frame A first actuator (70) associated with the a frame and lift frame powered by an electrical system of the vehicle First and second arms (80) and first and second receivers (140) on the mount frame and lift frame for connection The lift frame having a latch mechanism (100,102) for securing the arms in said receivers and an actuator for moving the latch mechanism between a latched an unlatched position Wherein the assembly is operable such that the vehicle is driven toward the snow plow and the arms are received in the receivers and the first actuator is energized to pivot the lift frame relative to the a frame to align the arms with the receivers While Barker discloses the invention as described above, it fails to disclose that the second actuator is also energized by the electrical system in response to sensor feedback. Like Barker, Fey also discloses a mounting mechanism for attaching a implement to a vehicle. Unlike Barker, Fey discloses that sensors can be utilized to monitor and control operation of actuators to pivot the lift frame vertically and control the latches (pgph 0060). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize sensors and actuators powered by a vehicle electrical system in Barker as taught by Fey to allow for automatic connection of the implement to the vehicle without the operator having to exit the vehicle as the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)). While the combination of Barker and Fey discloses the invention as described above, it fails to specifically disclose that an automatic connection between the vehicle electrical system and the implement is achieved without manual interference. Like the combination of Barker and Fey, Harris also discloses a coupling system for a vehicle and an implement. Unlike the combination, Harris discloses that electrical connections in addition to mechanical connections can be automatically achieved without the operator having to exit the vehicle (abstract; pgph 0032). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the automatic electrical connection of Harris in the combination of Barker and Fey such that the operator does not have to leave the vehicle for either the mechanical or electrical connections to be made. Regarding claim 71, the combination discloses that the first actuator is a hydraulic cylinder operably connected to said a-frame and to said lift frame, but fails to disclose that the second actuator is an electric linear actuator. It would have been an obvious matter of art recognized equivalence to utilize an electric linear actuator, as Applicant has not disclosed that it solves any stated problem of the prior art or is for any particular purpose. It appears that the invention would perform equally well as the invention disclosed by the combination. Regarding claims 70, 77-81, 83, 88 Fey discloses that the sensor/controller system functions such that the second sensor senses the latched/unlatched position of the latch pins and the first sensor senses the position of the lift frame in relation to the mount frame such that the latch pins are actuated when the lift frame is in the correct/aligned position and the correct/aligned position is achieved by the first actuator raising and lowering the lift frame by means of a support stand/jack (pgph 0060-0064). The combination would therefore disclose that the actuators are controlled by the sensor control system of Harris such that the latch pins can be connected without the operator exiting the vehicle. Regarding claims 72-75, 84-87 the combination discloses the invention as described above but fails to disclose the type of sensor utilized for the first and second sensors. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize resistance sensors, potentiometers, linear encoders or any other type of sensor capable of sensing the condition of the alignment of position of the actuators as it would have been an obvious matter of art recognized equivalence to utilize different types of sensors as Applicant has not disclosed that it solves any stated problem of the prior art or is for any particular purpose. It appears that the invention would perform equally well as the invention disclosed by the combination of Barker and Fey. Regarding claim 90, the combination discloses that the arms are on the lift frame and the receivers are on the mount frame. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see page 11, filed 11/12/25, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 69-90 under Barker in view of Fey have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Harris. Upon closer review it was determined that the previous rejection did not clearly disclose that an electrical connection was made between the vehicle and the implement without the operator leaving the vehicle. Barker does disclose an electrical connection and Fey does disclose automatic connections between the mechanical components but it was not clearly disclosed that the combination would also disclose an automatic electrical connection. As such Harris was added to the combination to show that it is known in the art to provide automatic electrical connections and this action is made Non-Final. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jamie L McGowan whose telephone number is (571)272-5064. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00-5:00 CST. 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, Chris Sebesta can be reached at 571-272-0547. 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. /JAMIE L MCGOWAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 27, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 12, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599055
APPARATUS, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PLANTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601129
SNOWPLOW BLADE EDGE SHOE AND METHODS OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590435
TRACTOR ATTACHMENT ACCESSORIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12543627
Sowing element for precision agricultural seeders and seeder including element of this kind
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12538856
LAND CULTIVATING SYSTEMS AND METHODS UTILIZING HIGH-PRESSURE FLUID JET CUTTING TECHNIQUES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+15.7%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 961 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