Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/038,920

METHOD FOR DESIGNING CYCLOIDAL GEAR TOOTH PROFILE OF GEAR SHIFT ACTUATOR

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
May 25, 2023
Examiner
LEWIS, TISHA D
Art Unit
3619
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Dae-Il Corporation
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
1075 granted / 1227 resolved
+35.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
1258
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§102
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
§112
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1227 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
DETAILED ACTION The following is a response to the amendment filed 12/9/2025 which has been entered. Response to Amendment Claims 1-14 are pending in the application. -The drawing objection has been withdrawn due to applicant submitting replacement drawings accordingly which have been approved. -The specification objection has been withdrawn due to applicant amending the abstract and content of specification accordingly. -The 112(b) rejection has been withdrawn due to applicant amending claims 1 and 6 accordingly. Note: Upon further consideration during follow up examination for allowance of application, the examiner came across other issues that need to be addressed that were missed during initial examination. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: Ro1: design pitch circle radius of inner tooth gear and ro1: design rolling circle radius of inner tooth gear. 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. 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 1-14 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. -Claim 1 recites the limitation "the theoretical value" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. -Claim 6 recites the limitation "the theoretical rolling circle radius" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. -Claim 4 recites the limitation "the theoretical eccentric amount (e)" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim due to this limitation not being recited (introduced) in claim 1. -Claim 9 recites the limitation "the theoretical eccentric amount (e)" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim due to this limitation not being recited (introduced) in claim 6. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention lacks patentable utility. MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), section III describes that: “the courts consider a mental process (thinking) that "can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper" to be an abstract idea.” The original and amended limitations of claims 1 and 6 seem to be written in an “abstract idea” form in which the claims recite limitations that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper, the limitations fall within the mental processes grouping, and the claims seem to recite an abstract idea. Please review the section of the MPEP indicated above and respond accordingly via amendment and/or rebuttal (examiner recommends applicant further review section I. Mathematical Concepts in case applicant chooses to amend claims 1 and 6 with equations described in original specification to overcome rejection). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-14 are still allowed via prior art purposes. Reasons for allowance will not be provided at this time due to the 112(b) and 101 rejections above. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. -JP 2014037851 (IDS cited art) has been reviewed again and found to be more pertinent to applicant’s disclosure than examiner initially thought (per use as “inventive step” prior art in PCT office action). JP discloses a cycloid design method and shows that it is well known in the art to add backlash value (m) to an inner tooth gear theoretical pitch circle (122) to obtain a rolling circle radius of tooth gear larger than the theoretical pitch circle radius (page 8, lines 26-30 in machine translation). JP, however, still lacks the limitations pertaining to forming design pitch circle and subtracting/adding predetermined backlash as recited in claims 1 and 6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TISHA D LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)272-7093. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30am to 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, Anna M Momper can be reached at 571-270-5788. 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. Tdl /TISHA D LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 February 27, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 25, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112
Oct 17, 2025
Interview Requested
Oct 27, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 27, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 09, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601395
ELECTRIC AXLE DRIVE FOR AN AXLE OF A MOTOR VEHICLE, IN PARTICULAR OF AN AUTOMOBILE, AND A MOTOR VEHICLE, IN PARTICULAR AN AUTOMOBILE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600357
COMPUTER SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592441
VIBRATION ISOLATORS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE-BATTERY ENCLOSURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592440
BATTERY PACK CASING HAVING CRUSH RESISTANCE AND THERMAL INSULATION FOR ELECTRIFIED VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590867
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EVALUATING CONTINUOUSLY VARIABLE TRANSMISSION
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
88%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+9.5%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1227 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