Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/005,508

LIGHTWEIGHT HANDLE HEAD

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Jan 13, 2023
Examiner
CANFIELD, ROBERT
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Lekisport AG
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
860 granted / 1133 resolved
+23.9% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
1164
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
36.9%
-3.1% vs TC avg
§102
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§112
26.3%
-13.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1133 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status This office action is in response to the amendment filed 10/03/25. Claim 1-23 and 25-27 are pending. Claim 24 has been canceled. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/20/25 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-3, 6-8, 15-17, 21, 22 and 27 as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. 2019/0216186 to Shintani et al. (cited as D1 in the Written Opinion mailed 08/10/2021 for PCT/EP2021/068293). Shintani provides a pole handle 10, for among other things, Nordic walking poles [0002], comprised of having a head region, a grip region 16 and an axial recess 54 which is open for receiving a pole tube [0047]. The handle having a core shown as having three apertures extending from lateral side to lateral side in mirror like symmetry and a closed top surface enclosing a cavity that extends longitudinally long a direction of travel. At least two inclined webs are shown on each side wall between the apertures forming a grid like structure (see at least Fig.3B). Three is considered to meet each of “at least one”, “at least two”, “three” and “and least three”. The disclosure is silent as to the area of the aperture(s) but as noted in the written opinion, ledge 22 is disclosed as having a length of 82 mm. From this, one having ordinary skill in the art could reasonably infer from the figures that at least one of the aperture has an area of 15 mm2 and thus a total aperture area would be at least 15 mm2. In accordance with MPEP 2125, the drawings can be relied upon for teaching structural features whether unexplained or unintended for what they reasonably disclosure or suggest to one having ordinary skill in the art. 15 mm2 includes at least 10 mm2. Claims 4, 5, 9-14, 18-20, 23, 25 and 26 are allowed. Applicant's arguments filed 10/03/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s main arguments are that Shitani et al. fails to provide a cavity that longitudinally extends along a direction of travel and that there are no side walls. This is not persuasive because as shown in the marked-up figures below, Shitani does in fact have side walls which include the webs separating three apertures to form vents 26. The figures suggest a continuous cavity from front to rear in the direction of travel as no walls are clearly visible dividing the spaces between the sidewalls, however, assuming argumento that even if there were webs from sidewall to sidewall, there would still be three cavities with an extent in the longitudinal direction of travel. PNG media_image1.png 921 751 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 694 637 media_image2.png Greyscale In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., one-piece, injection molding processes, cushioning) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Further, the claims use the transitional phrase, “comprising” which is open ended and it is irrelevant if the reference has different reasons for its structure as long as each of the claimed features is provided. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ROBERT CANFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-6840. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6, some Saturdays. 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 571-272-6670. 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. ROBERT CANFIELD Primary Examiner Art Unit 3636 /Robert Canfield/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 13, 2023
Application Filed
May 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Oct 03, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 05, 2026
Final Rejection — §102
Apr 08, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 10, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595676
HINGE-TYPE CONNECTOR FOR CONNECTING ONE-TOUCH FOLDING TENT FRAME MEMBERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593901
FOLDABLE CRUTCH STOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588765
ROCKING FURNITURE MEMBER WITH POWER SYNCHRONOUS MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584316
CANTILEVER UMBRELLA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575680
CONVERTIBLE PLATFORM FOR SUPPORTING A USER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
76%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+17.8%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1133 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