Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/945,903

Motorized Handcart Backpack

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Sep 15, 2022
Examiner
JOHNSON, VICKY A
Art Unit
3617
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
854 granted / 1070 resolved
+27.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1105
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
16.3%
-23.7% vs TC avg
§102
52.9%
+12.9% vs TC avg
§112
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1070 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the handheld speed and brake controller is wireless as recited in claim 7 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): 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 8-10 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. In claim 8 it is unclear how the controller sets the motorized electric hubs. In claim 9 it is unclear how a speed of each of the motorized electric hubs is set separately. In claim 10 it is unclear how a speed of each of the motorized electric hubs is proportional to a step size and step frequency of a person. 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. Claim(s) 1-5, 7 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bristol (US 8,893,937) in view of Fysh (GB 2123362). Bristol discloses a handcart comprising: a pair of two wheels (152a, 152b), a support frame (145a, 145b) attached to the pair of two wheels (152a, 152b); a backpack frame (105) attached to the support frame (145a, 145b); a handheld speed and brake controller (col. 7 lines 66-67, 160) communicably attached to each of the hubs (unnumbered hub of 152a and 152b). Bristol does not disclose each wheel comprising a motorized electric hub. Fysh teaches the use of a motorized electric hub (2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the device of Bristol to include the motorized electric hub as taught by Fysh in order to facilitate assembly. Re claim 2, Bristol discloses an adjustable shoulder strap (130a) attached to the backpack frame (105). Re claim 3, Bristol discloses an adjustable waist strap (138) attached to the backpack frame (105). Re claim 4, Bristol discloses a bracket (115) configured to provide a separation between the backpack frame (105) and the support frame (145a, 145b) for a movement of a person wearing the backpack frame (105). Re claim 5, Bristol discloses a load support (215) disposed across a back of the support frame (145a, 145b) and configured to prevent a load from falling off the back of the handcart (see Fig 2). Re claim 7, Bristol discloses the handheld speed and brake controller (col. 7 lines 66-67, 160) is wireless and in a wireless communication and Fysh teaches the use of each of the motorized electric hubs (2). Re claim 14, Bristol discloses the backpack frame (105) is reversibly attachable to a person wearing the backpack frame to be forward facing or rearward facing *see Figs 2 and 3). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 8-10 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Some further comment regarding the Applicant’s remarks are deemed appropriate. Applicant's arguments filed August 13, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has failed to address the 112 2nd rejections of claim 8-10. Bristol discloses in ¶11 that the controller is handheld. Applicant’s remarks have been accorded due consideration; however, they are not deemed fully persuasive. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICKY A JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7106. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday. 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, John R Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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. /VICKY A JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 15, 2022
Application Filed
May 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Aug 13, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601369
Modular Cable Replacement
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601389
PNEUMATIC-LIQUID AUTO-BALANCE ACTUATOR WITH LARGE DIAMETER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595917
CONTROL UNIT AND COOKING APPLIANCE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596392
PEDAL ASSEMBLIES INCLUDING REDUNDANT SENSING SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589828
ELECTRIC MODULE FOR BICYCLE, BICYCLE TIRE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, AND TIRE CONDITION DIAGNOSIS METHOD OF BICYCLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+12.1%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1070 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