Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/873,431

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONVERTING MOBILE HOME AXLE ASSEMBLIES

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 26, 2022
Examiner
BELLINGER, JASON R
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
846 granted / 1215 resolved
+17.6% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
1264
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
33.2%
-6.8% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
35.7%
-4.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1215 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "102" and "103" have both been used to designate the plate in Figure 2. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “101D” has been used to designate both the projection and either an axis or portion of the knuckle in Figure 5. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains legal terms (see below). The term “rim” should be replaced with the term - -disc- - given the fact that a “rim” is ONLY the portion of a wheel on which a tire is mounted. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “comprises”, “means”, and “said,” should be avoided. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The term “rim” should be replaced with the term - -disc- - throughout the specification, given the fact that a “rim” is ONLY the portion of a wheel on which a tire is mounted. In line 5 of paragraph [0004], the first instance of the term “popular” should be removed from the phrase “popular a popular”, for grammatical clarity. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claims 1, 10, and 16-17 are objected to because of the following informalities: The term “rim” should be replaced with the term - -disc- - throughout these claims, given the fact that a “rim” is ONLY the portion of a wheel on which a tire is mounted. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-15 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. The term “flat” in claims 1 and 10 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “flat” is not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. No quantitative or qualitative limitations have been set forth in the claims to clearly define this term. In this instance it is unclear whether the term “flat” is meant to define a surface finish of the knuckle or shape of the top surface of the knuckle (i.e. that the top surface is “planar”). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 16-20 are allowed. Claims 1-15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references show wheel adaptor assemblies. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON R BELLINGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6680. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-4. 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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached on (571)272-6684. 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. /JASON R BELLINGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 26, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Apr 09, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 09, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583251
WHEELS WITH CONTROLLABLE SUCTION DEVICES FOR ADHESION ON SURFACES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576930
Traction Cleat for Vehicle Tracks
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576677
CORROSION PROTECTION FOR AIRCRAFT WHEEL PNEUMATIC PORTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570104
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR LOCKING AND STABILIZING A WHEEL COVER ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559185
SUPPORT STRUCTURE HAVING A SEAL FOR A TRACK ASSEMBLY AND SUPPORT STRUCTURE HAVING A GUIDE RAIL
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
70%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+18.5%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1215 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month