Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/180,611

GRIPPER BASE AND GRIPPER SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 08, 2023
Examiner
MASINICK, JONATHAN PETER
Art Unit
3678
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Delta Electronics Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
508 granted / 742 resolved
+16.5% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
769
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
38.9%
-1.1% vs TC avg
§102
31.3%
-8.7% vs TC avg
§112
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 742 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 3/17/2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the application CN202210266209.7 as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Examiner notes that it appears a request for foreign document retrieval was unsuccessful. PNG media_image1.png 436 726 media_image1.png Greyscale Drawings The drawings were received on 6/8/2023. These drawings are approved and entered. The drawings are objected to because of the following: Figure 1: “C” is incorrectly underlined. Underlined reference numerals should be used to designate a surface. Examiner suggests removing the underlining and add an arrowhead lead line to indicate a structure. Figure 4: “500” is incorrectly underlined. Underlined reference numerals should be used to designate a surface. Examiner suggests removing the underlining and add an arrowhead lead line to indicate a structure. 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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. Claim 7 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. Re Clm 7: this claim recites “when the guiding rod is in the second position of the groove, the guiding rod is in contact with the concave structure and adjacent to the bottom end”. Examiner notes that “the second position” should be corrected to --the first position--, since the guiding rod is in the concave structure in the first position, not the second. See Specification paragraph 0044. 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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by TWM 458768, hereafter ‘768. Re Clm 1: ‘768 discloses a gripper base (fig 2), comprising: a housing (2); a movable member (3); an elastic member (5), connected to the housing (on peg 231) and the movable member (seated in 310); a position restricting mechanism (33, 34, 35), disposed on the movable member, comprising: a groove (33), having a top surface (35); and a block (34), having an upper surface (341) facing the top surface (see fig 1), wherein the groove surrounds the block (see fig 1 and 3), the top surface has a protrusion (35) protruding toward the block, and the upper surface has a concave structure (indented seat at top of block); a guiding rod (4), wherein one end (41) of the guiding rod is pivotally connected to the housing (at 221), and another end (42) of the guiding rod enters the groove (See fig 4); and an engaging member (6), pivotally connected to the movable member. Re Clm 2: ‘768 discloses wherein the protrusion has a top end, the concave structure has a bottom end (bottom end of block 34), and the movable member is movable along a first axis relative to the housing, wherein as seen from the first axis, a distance is formed between the top end and the bottom end (figs 5a-5c). Re Clm 3: ‘768 discloses wherein the protrusion has a first bottom end (33b) and a second bottom end (33a), and the movable member is movable along a first axis relative to the housing (along vertical axis shown in fig 4), wherein as seen from the first axis, the first bottom end overlaps the concave structure, and the second bottom end is separated from the concave structure (see fig 4). PNG media_image2.png 176 240 media_image2.png Greyscale Re Clm 4: ‘768 discloses wherein the groove has an inclined surface (330) connected to the first bottom end and inclined relative to a second axis, and the second axis is substantially perpendicular to the first axis. Re Clm 5: ‘768 discloses wherein the block further comprises a lower surface (bottom surface of 34) opposite to the upper surface, and the movable member is movable along a first axis relative to the housing, wherein the lower surface is inclined relative to a second axis, and the second axis is substantially perpendicular to the first axis. Re Clm 6: ‘768 discloses wherein the gripper base further comprises a driving member (slot 241) disposed on the housing, wherein when the guiding rod is in a first position of the groove (top of groove, see figs 5b and 5c), the engaging member is at a closed angle relative to the housing, and when the guiding rod moves from the first position to a second position of the groove (at bottom of groove), the driving member contacts and pushes the engaging member (pins 611 and 612), and the engaging member rotates from the closed angle to an open angle (as shown in fig 5a). Re Clm 7 (as best understood): ‘768 discloses wherein the concave structure has a bottom end, and when the guiding rod is in the second position of the groove, the guiding rod is in contact with the concave structure and adjacent to the bottom end (see configurations in figs 5a-5c). Re Clm 8: ‘768 discloses wherein the gripper base further comprises a guiding member (sides 21), disposed on the housing and having a guiding slot (212), wherein the movable member has a sliding portion (311), slidably disposed in the guiding slot. 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 (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 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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TWM 458768, hereafter ‘768 in view of Gilbert (US 5492414). Re Clm 9: ‘768 fails to disclose wherein the gripper base further comprises a plurality of balls, and the balls are in contact with the movable member and the sliding portion. Gilbert teaches a well-known linear sliding bearing comprising a plurality of balls (18, 19, 28, 36, etc.), and the balls are in contact with a movable member and a sliding portion. This is taught for the purpose of providing a low-friction linear sliding action between two members, reducing friction and increasing ease of movement. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided the sliding configuration of ‘768 with another well-known linear sliding configuration comprising a plurality of balls, and the balls are in contact with the movable member and the sliding portion. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 10-11 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Examiner notes that the prior art fails to disclose a gripper system as claimed. Although a gripper base is provided in the relied upon prior art, the combination of the base of ‘768 with a gripper device with connecting members connected by a magnetic attracting force, and a claw flake having a protruding portion and wherein when the gripper device brings the claw flake to move toward the gripper base along a first axis, the claw flake contacts and pushes the engaging member from an open angle to a closed angle, and the engaging member affixes the claw flake to the gripper base. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN PETER MASINICK whose telephone number is (571)270-3060. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8a-5p EST. 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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571)270-5281. 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. /JONATHAN P MASINICK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 08, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601365
IMPROVEMENTS IN OR RELATING TO HANGERS AND HANGER SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595631
BARRIER SYSTEMS WITH IMPACT RESISTANT RAILS SUPPORTED FROM FLOOR MOUNTED POST BASES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590427
Guard Rail System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584317
RAIL CABLE TENSIONER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577981
BALL JOINT WITH NOTCHED OUTER RING
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
68%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.9%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 742 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