Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/098,220

END EFFECTOR

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 18, 2023
Examiner
CHIN, PAUL T
Art Unit
3654
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
825 granted / 1155 resolved
+19.4% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1188
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
38.5%
-1.5% vs TC avg
§102
35.0%
-5.0% vs TC avg
§112
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1155 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/18/23 and 9/4/25 were filed and the submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification The title of the invention (“End Effector”) is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. 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 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. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schaefer, Jr. et al. (3,843,187) . RE claim 1, Schaefer, Jr. et al. (3,843,187) discloses an end effector comprising: a linkage mechanism (50, 52, and 52) (See Fig. 5) (see Exhibit A ) coupled to a tip of a robot arm (16 of Fig. 1) (see Col. 1, lines 25-34), wherein the linkage mechanism includes openable and closable arm portions provided on a tip side of the linkage mechanism, and grip portions (10, 10’, 26, 26) acquired by extension of the arm portions. Exhibit A Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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 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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaefer, Jr. et al. (3,843,187) in view of Wilson et al. (3,630,391). Schaefer, Jr. et al. (3,843,187) , as presented above, does not specifically show the linkage mechanism includes an elastic member, provided between the arm portions, configured to extend when the arm portions are open and contract when the arm portions are closed. However, Wilson et al. (3,630,391) teaches an elastic member (72) provided on the grip portions for opening and closing. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide an elastic member on the grip portion (10, 10’) of Schaefer, Jr. et al. (3,843,187) as taught by Wilson et al. (3,630,391) to provide for closing or opening of the grip portion to a user. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaefer, Jr. et al. (3,843,187) in view of Dickey et al. (5,364,147). Schaefer, Jr. et al. (3,843,187) , as presented above, does not specifically show a protrusion angle of the protrusion members of the grip portions . However, Figs. 7 and 8 of Dickey et al. (5,364,147) teach a plurality of angled protrusion members ( 46, 46) of the grip portions (see from Col. 4, line 65, to Col. 5, line 17). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a plurality of angled protrusion members (46, 46) on the grip portions (10) (see Fig. 2) of Schaefer, Jr. et al. (3,843,187) as taught by Dickey et al. (5,364,147) to firmly grasp an object. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT PAUL T CHIN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272- 6922. The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8:00-4:30 PM . 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, Robert Hodge, can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-2097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /PAUL T CHIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 18, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594679
GRIPPER DEVICE USING AIR-TUBE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589953
VACUUM CUP AND A METHOD OF PROCESSING A THIN GLASS SHEET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584281
WASTE COLLECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577006
EGG CONVEYOR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576542
HELICAL PIN GRIPPER
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+15.2%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1155 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