Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/219,405

TOOL STORAGE UNITS WITH INTEGRATED POWER

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jul 07, 2023
Examiner
ISLAM, SANJIDUL
Art Unit
3736
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Snap-On Incorporated
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
95 granted / 158 resolved
-9.9% vs TC avg
Strong +40% interview lift
Without
With
+40.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
202
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
48.4%
+8.4% vs TC avg
§102
21.4%
-18.6% vs TC avg
§112
27.3%
-12.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 158 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/05/2025 has been entered. Response to Amendment Claims 1, 6-8 are pending. Claims 2-5, 9, 10 are canceled. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The specification fails to describe how the following limitation of claim 1 “wherein the power strip is adapted to remain stationary when the compartment is moved relative to the power strip between the opened and closed positions” is performed. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. A. Claim 1 recites “wherein the power strip is adapted to remain stationary when the compartment is moved relative to the power strip between the opened and closed positions”. However, the written specification fails to disclose how compartment can move relative to the power strip since the power strip is mounted on the compartment via slidable connection. 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 1, 6-8 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 “wherein the power strip is adapted to remain stationary when the compartment is moved relative to the power strip between the opened and closed positions”. It is unclear how the compartment can move relative to the power strip since the power strip is mounted on the compartment. If the compartment moves then the power strip should also move along with it. Accordingly, the claim has not been further treated on the merits. [W]here there is a great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of the limitations of a claim, it would not be proper to reject such a claim on the basis of prior art. As stated in In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962), a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should not be based on considerable speculation about the meaning of terms employed in a claim or assumptions that must be made as to the scope of the claims. MPEP 2173.06(II). In this case, there would require a great deal of speculation as to how the power strip stays stationary while the compartment is opened/moved. All the dependent claims inherit the same issue. Further correction and or clarification is required. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/05/2025 have been fully considered but none of the prior arts are utilized in the current office action as such these arguments are moot. Applicants argument that fig. 2and para 29 discloses the power strip is adapted to remain stationary when the compartment is moved relative to the power strip is not persuasive. The specification or the drawing fails to show/describe how the power strip stays stationary when the compartment is moved. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANJIDUL ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-7670. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 -5:00. 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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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. /SANJIDUL ISLAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3736 /ORLANDO E AVILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 07, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 10, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Oct 15, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 13, 2024
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Feb 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 18, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jul 07, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 05, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 05, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12570430
LID CORNER WITH INTERNAL LAYER CUTOUT SHAPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12507776
Lockable Lunch Bag Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12479622
BRUSH-PRODUCT PACKAGING DEVICE AND TRAY PACKAGING FOR FORMING A RECEPTACLE FOR AT LEAST TWO BRUSH-PRODUCT PACKAGING DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12473117
COMPOSITE TRAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12447602
TOOL BAG STRUCTURE HAVING FASTENER
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 21, 2025
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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
60%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+40.1%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 158 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