Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/032,983

WEAR ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Apr 20, 2023
Examiner
PEZZUTO, ROBERT ERIC
Art Unit
3671
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Bradken Resources Pty Limited
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
1085 granted / 1274 resolved
+33.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1307
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
30.7%
-9.3% vs TC avg
§102
34.6%
-5.4% vs TC avg
§112
26.7%
-13.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1274 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on February 9, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 95 and 100 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Briscoe (USP 7,171,771). Regarding claim 95: Briscoe discloses a wear member assembly for attaching to a support structure of earth working equipment (as seen in figures 1-16) comprising: a wear member assembly (as seen in figures 1, 12 and 13) for attaching to a support structure of earth working equipment (as seen in figures 12 and 13, at 76) comprising: a wear member (as seen in figure 12, at 17) comprising a body having a first end, an opposite second end that incorporates a cavity configured to receive the support structure, and a locking hole (as seen in annotated figure below) extending in the body along a locking hole axis to the cavity; a lock (as seen in figure 12, generally 10a) movable within the locking hole, the lock comprising a lock body having a first end region (as seen in annotated figure below) for engaging with the support structure to secure the wear member with the support structure, and a retaining arrangement (as seen in figure 8, at 58, 62, 63) operative to resist movement of the lock in the wear member under loading in a direction of the hole axis, the retaining arrangement comprising a plurality of retainers (as seen in figure 4, at 58) angularly spaced apart about the lock hole axis when the lock body is in a locked position. PNG media_image1.png 283 386 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 100: Briscoe discloses a wear member (as seen in figures 1-16) for attaching to a support structure of earth working equipment (as seen in figures 12 and 13, at 76), the wear member comprising: a body (as seen in figure 12, at 17) comprising a first end, an opposite second end that incorporates a cavity configured to receive the support structure (as seen in annotated figure above), and a locking hole having a locking hole axis (as seen in annotated figure above) extending in the body to the cavity, the locking hole being arranged to receive a lock (as seen in figure 12, generally 10a) to secure the wear member to the support structure and being defined by an interior wall surface that incorporates a component of an engaging structure (as seen in figure 8, at 62, 63) arranged to engage with a complementary component of the engaging structure disposed on an exterior surface of the lock (as seen in figure 8, at 58 and 40) to form at least part of a retaining arrangement to resist movement of the lock in the wear member under loading in a direction of the hole axis, the component of the engaging structure is formed as one or more ribs (as seen in figure 7, at 66) that projects into the locking hole, the engaging structure is helical, or part helical (as seen in figure 8 and 9, “thread” portion 40,40a) and the pitch of the engaging structure promotes rotation and axial movement of the lock under loading on the lock a direction of the locking hole axis (as seen in figures 8 and 9, inherent in “threads” 40, 40a as an axial force is applied thereto). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed February 9, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 95: Applicant’s representative argues: “Claim 95 recites a retaining arrangement comprising "a plurality of retainers angularly spaced apart about the locking hole axis when the lock body is in a locked position." Thus, claim 95 is not satisfied by a single retainer, nor by features that are merely capable of being arranged in some unspecified way; rather, the claim requires a plurality of retainers that are "angularly spaced apart about the locking hole axis when the lock body is in a locked position." As discussed in the above rejection, the Briscoe lock device contains a plurality of teeth about is circumference, these teeth in concert with members 62 and 63 or broadly 60 (as seen in figure 7) form a “retaining arrangement” with the teeth 58 acting as “retainers” being both “a plurality” and “angularly spaced apart about the locking hole axis” (as discussed above) and therefore allow Briscoe to anticipated claim 95 as currently written. Regarding claim 100: A newly written rejection is set forth above better pointing out how Briscoe has been applied to the claims, the structural makeup of the retaining arrangement and retainers as well as the inherent “spin” caused by Briscoe’s thread means. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 80-94, 99 and 101-104 are allowed. Claims 96-98 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT ERIC PEZZUTO whose telephone number is (703)756-1320. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3:30pm. 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, Joseph M. Rocca can be reached at 571-272-8971. 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 E PEZZUTO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 20, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Feb 09, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601151
Universal Hydraulic Connecting Quick Coupler System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601139
CONSTRUCTION MACHINE ATTACHMENT MOUNTING AND DEMOUNTING APPARATUS AND CONSTRUCTION MACHINE EQUIPPED WITH SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590438
IMPLEMENT CONNECTION SYSTEM AND VEHICLE HAVING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590430
CLEARING STRIP FOR THE CLEARING BLADE OF A SNOWPLOW
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588600
ELECTRIC MOWER
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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+9.1%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1274 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