Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/872,151

SUSPENSION SYSTEM FOR POWER WHEELCHAIR STANDER

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 25, 2022
Examiner
WATKINS, NATHANIEL WILLIAM
Art Unit
3611
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Motion Concepts L P
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
21 granted / 26 resolved
+28.8% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
53
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
63.1%
+23.1% vs TC avg
§102
18.9%
-21.1% vs TC avg
§112
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 26 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 Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed 10/29/2025, with respect to claims 1-13, 15, and 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of 4/29/2025 has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 112(f). Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. Claim 15 limitations “means for supporting a user in a seated position and an elevated position”, “means for supporting the at least one front caster”, and “means for transferring a portion of the user's weight” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Claim 15, its dependent claim 20, and the specification contain no structural limitations clearly linked to the claimed means for supporting a user, for supporting a caster, and for transferring a user's weight. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Applicant may: (a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; (b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)). If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either: (a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181. 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 15 and 20 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. Since the claim 15 limitations “means for supporting a user in a seated position and an elevated position”, “means for supporting the at least one front caster”, and “means for transferring a portion of the user's weight” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) but cannot be clearly linked to corresponding structures within the applicant’s specification, the claim is indefinite and does not particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter of the invention. By nature of dependencies, claim 20 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Allowable Subject Matter The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. The prior art of record (e.g. Mulhern [US 7264272] and Mulhern-383 [US 9808383]) fails to teach all limitations of the following claims, particularly as follows: Claim 1: A wheelchair comprising: … a suspension system comprising:… a first link pivotally connected to the frame; a second link pivotally connected to the first link and the front caster arm; the first and second slot and pin configurations (as claimed in claim 1 of the instant application) and wherein when increased force of a user of the wheelchair is applied against the first link, the movement of the front caster arm is limited in an upward direction. Claim 10: A wheelchair comprising: … a suspension system comprising… a plurality of linkages coupled to the frame and the front caster arm and wherein the plurality of linkages comprise a first slot and a first pin connection between a first linkage and the front caster arm and a second slot and second pin connection between a second linkage and the first linkage, wherein the first pin is configured to move between an upper end of the first slot and a lower end of the first slot, and wherein user weight applied against the second linkage forces the first and second linkages into contact with the first pin biasing it in a downward direction and impeding upward movement of the first pin. Since the prior art (Mulhern [US 7264272] and Mulhern-383 [US 9808383]) teach wheelchair suspensions that lack said features, the prior art does not anticipate the claimed subject matter. For illustration purposes, Fig. 3 of the examined disclosure shows a wheelchair suspension system with two connected links and two extended slots with pin connections, which is different than the wheelchair suspension systems taught by the prior art of record (Figs. 2 and 3b of Mulhern and Figs 3a and 4b of Mulhern-303, etc…) Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to a skilled artisan to have modified the prior art in order to arrive at the claimed invention without resorting to impermissible hindsight. Claims 2-9 and 11-13 are allowed as depending from an allowed parent claim (see above). 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 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL WILLIAM WATKINS whose telephone number is (703)756-4744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:30 am -6:00 pm EST; Friday 8:30 am - 2:00 pm EST. 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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at (571)272-6265. 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. /N.W.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /JOHN OLSZEWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 25, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Oct 29, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589822
IN-FRAME MOUNTED BICYCLE DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576678
Rotating Trailer Hitch Arm
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569382
MOBILITY SUPPORT DEVICE WITH STEP CLIMBING MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570344
CONNECTION DEVICE FOR CONNECTING CLEANING CARTS AND CLEANING SYSTEM COMPRISING TWO OR MORE CLEANING CARTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12539926
TRACK ASSEMBLY HAVING A ROTATION LIMITING DEVICE AND VEHICLE HAVING SAME
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
81%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.8%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 26 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