Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/032,061

Magnetic Sealing Arrangement with Securing Mechanism

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Apr 14, 2023
Examiner
NEWAY, BLAINE GIRMA
Art Unit
3735
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Fidlock GmbH
OA Round
2 (Final)
30%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 7m
To Grant
70%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 30% of cases
30%
Career Allow Rate
169 granted / 569 resolved
-40.3% vs TC avg
Strong +40% interview lift
Without
With
+40.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 7m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
609
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
54.2%
+14.2% vs TC avg
§102
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 569 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 . 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. Claim 13 is 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. Claim 13 recites “the at least one first securing part is configured to be adjusted into the securing position only after the closure compound is present in its sealing position”, it is unclear how and why the first securing part is configured to be adjusted into securing position “only” after the closure compound is in its sealing position. For example, it is not clear what prevents the first securing part (that is not engaged to the second securing part) to engage the third securing part. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1-4, 7-8, 12-13, 24 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naftali (US 9,966,174) in view of Demus (US 5,816,709). Regarding claim 1, Naftali (fig.5) discloses a closure device for closing an opening that is formed between a first closing portion (top portion of first wall 250) and a second closing portion (top portion of second wall 248), wherein the closure device includes a first closure part 212 and a third part 240 for arrangement on the first closing portion (top portion of first wall 250) and a second a second part 210 for arrangement on the second closing portion (top portion of second wall 248), wherein the first closure part 212 has a first strip body longitudinally extended along a transverse direction, the second closure part 210 has a second strip body longitudinally extended along the transverse direction, the first closure part 212 and the second closure part 210 cooperate in a magnetically attracting manner in such a way that in a closed position of the closure device, the first closing portion and the second closing portion rest against each other and form a closure compound with the first and second closure parts 212 210, the closure compound capable of being adjusted from a release position, in which the first and second closing portions can be separated from each other against a magnetic force applied by the first and second closure parts 212, 210 to clear the opening, into a closing position in which the closure compound and the third closure part 240 cooperate in a magnetically attracting manner in such a way that the closure compound is maintained in the closing position. Naftali fails to disclose: an additional securing mechanism via which the closure compound disposed in its closing position is additionally secured against removal from the third closure part 240 and hence against undesired opening in the closing position, Wherein the securing mechanism comprises at least one first securing part at least one second securing part and the closure device comprises at least one magnetic element, wherein the at least one first securing part, for securing the closure compound in its closing position and blocking the closure compound against an adjustment into the release position, is positioned in a securing position in which the at least one first securing part is connected to the at least one second securing part in a form-fitting manner, and a magnetic force applied by the at least one magnetic element to position the at least one first securing part in the securing position. However, Demus teaches a bag secured by first second and third closure parts, provided with an additional securing mechanism including a flap 16 and hook and loop fastener 29a-b (figs. 5 and 10-12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have provided the device of Naftali, an additional securing mechanism, to maintain the device in the closed position by ensure the closure parts remain fastened as taught by Demus in col. 4, lines 48-51. Regarding the additional securing mechanism including a magnetic force applied by the at least one magnetic element to position the at least one first securing part in the securing position, Naftali discloses magnets are a well know attachment mechanism (col. 1, lines 32-37). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the additional securing mechanism of the modified Naftali, magnets, to improve ease of alignment and attachment. Also, both hook and loop fasteners and magnets are well known functionally equivalent fastening mechanisms used to detachably secure components together. Such fasteners are routinely interchanged by one of ordinary skill in the art depending on design preference. Regarding claim 2, Naftali further discloses the closure device being provided for closing an opening via which a hollow body is accessible, which is bordered by flexible walls 250, 248 (fig. 5). Regarding claim 3, the modified Naftali further discloses the additional securing mechanism is adapted to (capable of) counteract a removal of the closure compound from the position due to an increased internal pressure in the hollow body (fig. 12 of Demus). Regarding claim 4, Naftali further discloses the closure compound can be adjusted from the release position by folding the first and second closing portions at least once into the closing position (fig. 5). Regarding claim 7, the modified Naftali further discloses the first and second strip bodies of closure parts 212 and 210 have two longitudinal ends and, in the closing position, the additional securing mechanism is adapted (or is capable of) to at least one of counteract a lifting force acting on the first and second strip bodies at the longitudinal ends and resulting from the increased internal pressure, by action of which mutually opposite longitudinal ends of the first and second strip bodies strive to move away from each other, and counteract a shear force resulting from the increased internal pressure, which acts in a middle area of the first or second strip bodies on the closure device in a plane extending parallel to the first and second closing portions (fig. 12 of Demus). Regarding claim 8, the modified Naftali further discloses via the additional securing mechanism there is provided a connection between the closure compound and a wall connected to the first closing portion (fig. 12 of Demus). Regarding claim 12, the modified Naftali further discloses the at least one magnetic element applies a magnetic force to adjust the at least one first securing part towards the securing position when the closure compound is adjusted towards its closing position (fig. 5 of Naftali and figs. 5 and 12 of Demus). Regarding claim 13, The modified Naftali further discloses the at least one first securing part 212 is configured to be adjusted into the securing position only after the closure compound is present in its sealing position (fig. 5 of Naftali). Regarding claim 24, the modified Naftali discloses the closure compound capable of being transferred from the release position into the closing position by folding or rolling the closure compound at least once about a pivot axis parallel to a first spatial direction, a force provided by hook and loop fastener 29a-b (of Demus) for holding the closure compound in its closing position with respect to the third closure part 240 acts along a spatial axis that is parallel to a second spatial direction extending perpendicularly to the first spatial direction, and via the securing mechanism the closure compound is secured against removal from the third closure part by action of a shear force which points in a third spatial direction that is both perpendicular to the first spatial direction and perpendicular to the second spatial direction (fig. 5 of Demus). The modified Naftali fails to disclose the force being a magnetic force. However, Naftali further teaches magnetic forces being used to engage two parts (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute a magnetic sealing mechanism as, for example, taught by the Naftali reference for the hook and loop sealing mechanism 29a-b of the modified Naftali, since it has been held that when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable result. KSR, 127 S.Ct. at 1740, 82 USPQ2d at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 50-51, 148 USPQ 479, 483 (1966)). Regarding claim 34, Naftali (fig. 5) discloses a closure device for closing opening that is formed between a first closing portion (top portion of wall 250) and a second closing portion (top portion of wall 248), and via which a hollow body is accessible, which is bordered by at least one flexible wall, wherein the closure device includes a first closure part 212 for arrangement on the first closing portion and a second closure part 210 for arrangement on the second closing portion, wherein the first closure part 212 has a first strip body longitudinally extended along a transverse direction, the second closure part 210 has a second strip body longitudinally extended along the transverse direction, the first closure part 212 and the second closure part 210 cooperate in a magnetically attracting manner in such a way that in a closed position of the closure device the first closing portion and the second closing portion rest against each other and form a closure compound with the first and second closure parts, the closure compound can be adjusted from a release position into a closing position by folding the first and second closing portions at least once, wherein, in the release position, the first and second closing portions can be separated from each other against a magnetic force applied by the first and second closure parts to clear the opening Naftali fails to disclose: a securing mechanism via which the closure compound disposed in its closing position is secured against an inadvertent removal of the closure compound from the closing position due to an increased internal pressure in the hollow bod; wherein the securing mechanism comprises at least one first securing part and at least one second securing part and the closure device comprises at least one magnetic element ; wherein the at least one first securing part for securing the closing compound in its closing position, is positioned in a securing position in which the at least one first securing part is connected to the at least one second securing part in a form-fitting manner, and a magnetic force being applied by the at least one magnetic element to position the at least one first securing part in the securing position. However, Demus teaches a bag secured by first second and third closure parts, provided with an additional securing mechanism including a flap 16 and hook and loop fastener 29a-b (figs. 5 and 10-12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have provided the device of Naftali, an additional securing mechanism, to maintain the device in the closed position by ensure the closure parts remain fastened as taught by Demus in col. 4, lines 48-51. Regarding the additional securing mechanism including a magnetic force applied by the at least one magnetic element to position the at least one first securing part in the securing position, Naftali discloses magnets are a well know attachment mechanism (col. 1, lines 32-37). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have made the additional securing mechanism of the modified Naftali, magnets, to improve ease of alignment and attachment. Also, both hook and loop fasteners and magnets are well known functionally equivalent fastening mechanisms used to detachably secure components together. Such fasteners are routinely interchanged by one of ordinary skill in the art depending on design preference. Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naftali (US 9,966,174) in view of Demus (US 5,816,709) further in view of Edwards (US 5,782,344). Regarding claim 31, Naftali (figs. 5) discloses a container capable of being used as a drink bladder, comprising a hollow body for receiving a liquid, and wherein the liquid can be filled into the hollow body via an opening that can be closed by a closure device for closing the opening that is formed between a first closing portion (top portion of wall 250) and a second closing portion (top portion of wall 248), wherein the sealing arrangement includes a first closure part 212 and a third closure part 240 for arrangement on the first closing portion and a second closure part 210 for arrangement on the second closing portion, wherein the first closure part 212 has a first strip body longitudinally extended along a transverse direction, the second closure part 210 has a second strip body longitudinally extended along the transverse direction, the first closure part 212 and the second closure part 210 cooperate in a magnetically attracting manner in such a way that in a closed position of the closure device the first closing portion and the second closing portion rest against each other and form a closure compound with the first and second closure parts 212, 210, and the closure compound is capable of being adjusted from a release position, in which the first and second closing portions can be properly separated from each other against a magnetic force applied by the first and second closing parts to clear the opening, into a closing position in which the closure compound and the third closing part 240 cooperate in a magnetically attracting manner in such a way that the closure compound is maintained in the closing position. Naftali fails to disclose: the hollow body comprising an outlet configured for connection to a drinking tube for the liquid; and an additional securing mechanism via which the closure compound disposed in its closing position is additionally secured against removal from the third closure part and hence against undesired opening in the closing position. However, Demus teaches a bag secured by first second and third closure parts, provided with an additional securing mechanism including a flap 16 and hook and loop fastener 29a-b (figs. 5 and 10-12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have provided the device of Naftali, an additional securing mechanism, to maintain the device in the closed position by ensure the closure parts remain fastened as taught by Demus in col. 4, lines 48-51. Further, Edwards teaches a pouch with an outlet 17 (fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have provided the modified device of Naftali, an outlet, to allow a small opening to be created for a straw to be inserted without having to open the securing mechanisms. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The magnetic fastener, despite including cooperating and magnetically positioned parts, performs the same releasable securing function as hook-and-loop fasteners and achieves a predictable attachment result. Such differences do not preclude obvious substitution and do not rely on hindsight. Conclusion 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 BLAINE GIRMA NEWAY whose telephone number is (571)270-5275. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM- 5:00PM. 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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at 571-272-4561. 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. /BLAINE G NEWAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3735 /Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 14, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 05, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 24, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 26, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 26, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12359771
PRESSURE TANK
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 15, 2025
Patent 12274669
ADMINISTRATION METHODS FOR ORAL MEDICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 15, 2025
Patent 12269673
FREIGHT CONTAINER INTENDED TO BE RECEIVED IN THE CARGO HOLD OF AN AIRCRAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 08, 2025
Patent 12179963
GASKETLESS CLOSURE FOR OPEN-TOP PAILS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 31, 2024
Patent 12178359
Containers and Lids and Methods of Forming Containers and Lids
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 31, 2024
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
30%
Grant Probability
70%
With Interview (+40.4%)
4y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 569 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