Office Action Predictor
Application No. 18/220,995

CLAMPING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 12, 2023
Examiner
HONG, SEAHEE
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Evermore International Group Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

68%
Career Allow Rate
525 granted / 767 resolved
Without
With
+30.8%
Interview Lift
avg trend
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
27 pending
794
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
38.1%
-1.9% vs TC avg
§102
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
§112
30.7%
-9.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§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 . Claim Objections Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the fourth clamping surface and fifth clamping surface” in line 3 should be corrected as --the fourth clamping surface and the fifth clamping surface--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: : “the fourth clamping surface and fifth clamping surface” in lines 1-2 should be corrected as --the fourth clamping surface and the fifth clamping surface--. Appropriate correction is required. 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 10 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. Claim 10: Claim 10 recites that “the fixed jaw includes a plurality of clamping surfaces, the movable jaw includes a plurality of clamping surfaces”. However, this renders the scope of the claim indefinite. Claim 3 (which upon claim 10 depends) recites “wherein the fixed jaw includes a first clamping surface, a second clamping surface, and a third clamping surface” in lines 1-2 and claim 5 (which upon claim 10 depends) recites “wherein the movable jaw further includes a fourth clamping surface and a fifth clamping surface” in lines 1-2. Claim 10 also recites further limitations of the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth clamping surfaces in the body of the claim. It is not clear how the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth clamping surfaces are different from the plurality of clamping surfaces of the fixed and movable jaws. For examination purposes, “the fixed jaw includes a plurality of clamping surfaces, the movable jaw includes a plurality of clamping surfaces” has been interpreted as --the fixed jaw includes a plurality of clamping surfaces including the first, second, and third clamping surfaces, the movable jaw includes a plurality of clamping surfaces including the fourth and fifth clamping surfaces--. Claim 10 positively recites “the first object is a luggage rack”. However, the scope of the claim is indefinite because “the first object” is recited as a functional limitation/intended use in claim 1 (which upon claim 10 depends) and it is not clear whether “the first object” is a part of the instant invention, a clamping device, or if the first object is a functional limitation/intended use. For examination purposes, “the first object is a luggage rack” is interpreted as a functional limitation/intended use that it is only required for the clamping device to be capable of being for clamping a luggage rack as a first object. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-4, 7-9 are allowed. Claims 5-6 would be allowable if rewritten to correct aforementioned minor informalities. Claim 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The subject matter of the independent claim(s) could either not be found or was not suggested in the prior art of record. The subject matter of independent claim 1 not found was a use of a movable member, a second connecting member, the lever being inserted to the rotatable rod and rotatable about a second rotation axis transverse to the first rotation axis, the movable member being screwed to a threaded section of the lever; in combination with the limitations set forth in claim 1 of the instant invention. None of the prior arts of record considered as a whole, alone or in combination, teaches or renders obvious the allowable subject matter of the instant invention. The closest prior art, Burton et al (3,930,681) teaches a similar clamping device including: a base 24 (col.2 line34) including at least one connection portion (the base 24 defines the at least one connection portion), the at least one connection portion being configured to be positioned on a first object 4 (col.2 lines34-36); and a clamping mechanism (fig2) including a lever 28 (col.2 line43), a rotatable rod 26 (col.2 line41-42), a fixed jaw 16 (col.2 line39-40), a movable jaw 40 (col.2 lines46-47), a connecting member 30 (col.2 line44), the rotatable rod 26 being connected to the base 24 and rotatable about a first rotation axis (an axis along the rotatable rod 26), the lever 28 being connected to the rotatable rod 26 (figs1-2) and rotatable (figs2-3), the fixed jaw 16 being connected to the base 24 (fig2), the movable jaw 40 being rotatably connected to the base 24 (figs2-3) so that the movable jaw 40 and the fixed jaw 16 are configured to clamp a second object 2 (figs2-3), the connecting member 30 being connected to and movable with the movable jaw 40 (figs2-3). Although the prior art of record teaches a similar clamping device, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the Burton et al to use a movable member, a second connecting member, the lever being inserted to the rotatable rod and rotatable about a second rotation axis transverse to the first rotation axis, the movable member being screwed to a threaded section of the lever; in combination with the limitations set forth in claim 1 of the instant invention. Thus, for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the independent claim 1. 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 The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Souris et al (US 10,179,394 B2), Higgins (2,427,603), Tyler et al (2,929,422), Hacking (2,995,794), Webb (3,346,929), Coutilish (3,480,271), Sevy et al (5,904,348), and Woiler et al (US 8,978,894 B1) teach similar clamping devices, however, none of the prior arts of record considered as a whole, alone or in combination, teaches or renders obvious the allowable subject matter of the instant invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Seahee Hong whose telephone number is (571)270-5778. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-4pm ET. 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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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. /SEAHEE HONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 12, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Apr 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12594411
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR JOINING METAL SLEEVE ONTO A TUBE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589980
Hand Tool with Slip Resistant Tip
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589623
MANEUVERABLE ERGONOMIC TRAILER STANDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581908
SUBSTRATE HOLDER AND METHOD FOR FIXING AND BONDING A SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577797
DUAL-HEADED PRY TOOL WITH ROTATABLE HEAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate 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 (+30.8%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 767 resolved cases by this examiner