Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/235,192

Windchimes Gift Box

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Aug 17, 2023
Examiner
RODRIGUEZ MOLINA, MARCOS JAVIER
Art Unit
3735
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
4 (Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
77%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
75 granted / 145 resolved
-18.3% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
188
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
49.9%
+9.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
§112
27.8%
-12.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 145 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . This Office Action is in response to the Non-Final Rejection filed on August 1, 2025 wherein: claim(s) 7, 10 were amended, claim(s) 9 canceled, and claim(s) 12 is new. The Examiner notes claim(s) 7-8, 10-11 are directed to overcome rejections under 35 USC § 103. Therefore, claim(s) 7-8, 10-12 are pending and will be examined. 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(s) 7-8, 10-12 is\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 7 recites --the at least one lid magnet magnetically associating with the at least one side magnetic so that lid 20 covers an interior 26 of container 12 to thereby provide protection-- [lines 6-7] wherein --magnetic--, --20--, --26--, --12-- are vague and indefinite. For purposes of examination --magnetic-- will be interpreted as “magnet”, and --20--, --26--, --12-- as “(20)”, “(26)”, “(12)” as reference characters per MPEP 608.01(m). Claim(s) 8, 10-12 rejected by dependency of claim 7. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 7-8, 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vance (Seller: Amazon, Name: “The Grandparent Gift...”, ASIN: B08D21YMX8, First Available Date: July 15, 2020, Product Reviewer: Deb Vance, Review Date: November 8, 2021) hereinafter VANCE, in view of Freistat (U. S. Patent US3181693A) hereinafter FREISTAT. Regarding claim 7, VANCE teaches (see Fig. 1 - Fig. 3 below) a wind chimes gift box V1-01 comprising: a container V1-02 having a bottom V1-03 and four sides V1-04 to define an interior V1-05; a lid V1-06 for closing the container V1-02 to protect contents V1-07 in the interior V1-05; and a magnetic closure system V3-01 comprising at least one lid magnet on the lid V1-06 and at least one side magnet on at least one of the sides V1-04 of the container V1-02, the at least one lid magnet magnetically associating with the at least one side V1-04 magnetic so that lid V1-06 20 covers an interior V1-05 26 of container V1-02 12 to thereby provide protection for the contents V1-07 contained in interior V1-05, wherein the lid V1-06 includes a first slot V1-08 to receive and hold a card V1-09; and wherein the interior V1-05 includes at least one wind chimes retention cutout V1-10 configured and dimensioned to receive a component of a wind chimes V1-07. VANCE fails to teach wherein the lid V1-06 includes a second slot to receive and hold a note. VANCE fails to teach wherein the interior V1-05 includes a plurality of wind chimes V1-07 retention cutouts configured, dimensioned, and arranged to accommodate a component of the wind chimes V1-07 to protect and display each individual chime component in the interior V1-05. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified lid V1-06 (with a second slot to receive and hold a note) as taught by the first slot V1-08 in the wind chimes gift box V1-01 of VANCE to meet design requirements since it is held as mere duplication of parts having no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP 2144.04 / VI / B. Duplication of Parts Moreover, FREISTAT teaches (see Fig. 1, Fig. 1A below) a carrying case 10 for musical instruments (page 5, col. 1, lines 9-14, “… musical instruments, jewelry, … ”) with a plurality of retention cutouts 26 with corresponding shape for disposal of subassemblies (page 5, col. 2, lines 50-54, “… to be disposed …”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified wind chimes retention cutout V1-10 in the wind chimes gift box V1-01 of VANCE with plurality of retention cutouts 26 as taught in the carrying case 10 of FREISTAT for disposal of subassemblies. PNG media_image1.png 744 706 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 263 889 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 973 775 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 560 686 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 989 908 media_image5.png Greyscale Regarding claim 8, VANCE and FREISTAT (as applied to claim 7 above) teaches all limitations of the claim. VANCE further teaches (see Fig. 1 - Fig. 3 above) wind chimes gift box V1-01, wherein the lid V1-06 is hingedly connected V1-11 to the container V1-02. Regarding claim 10, VANCE and FREISTAT (as applied to claim 8 above) teaches all limitations of the claim. VANCE fails to teach (see Fig. 1 - Fig. 3 above) wind chimes gift box V1-01, wherein the interior V1-05 of the container V1-02 includes velvet padding V1-12. Moreover, FREISTAT teaches (see Fig. 1, Fig. 1A above) carrying case 10, wherein the interior of the container 18 includes velvet padding (page 5, col. 1, lines 32-34, “… velvet …”) for protection purposes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified interior V1-05 in the wind chimes gift box V1-01 of VANCE and FREISTAT with interior of the container 18 as taught in the carrying case 10 of FREISTAT for protection purposes. Regarding claim 11, VANCE and FREISTAT (as applied to claim 10 above) teaches all limitations of the claim. VANCE further teaches (see Fig. 1 - Fig. 3 above) wind chimes gift box V1-01, wherein the first slot V1-08 opens in a first direction V1-13 which is parallel to a long edge V1-15 of the lid V1-06 VANCE fails to teach second slot opens in a second direction V1-14 which is perpendicular to the first direction V1-13 and parallel to a short edge V1-16 of the lid V1-06. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified second slot (to open in second direction V1-14 being perpendicular to first direction V1-13) in the wind chimes gift box V1-01 of VANCE and FREISTAT to meet design requirements since the particular placement (of second slot) is held to be an obvious matter of design choice. MPEP 2144.04 / V. / C. Rearrangement of Parts Regarding claim 12, VANCE and FREISTAT (as applied to claim 11 above) teaches all limitations of the claim. The combination of VANCE (see Fig. 1 - Fig. 3 above) and FREISTAT (see Fig. 1, Fig. 1A above) further teaches wind chimes gift box V1-01, wherein the plurality of wind chimes retention cutouts V1-10 comprises a plurality of discrete, elongated channels 18 separated by partition walls F1A-01 sized to cradle each tubular chime element so that adjacent chime elements cannot contact one another during transport. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments / amendments regarding rejections under 35 USC § 103 filed on November 3, 2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejections does not rely on exactly all references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the Applicant’s arguments. With respect to the art rejections, in accordance with MPEP 2111.01, during examination, the claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow. In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 367 F.3d 1359, 70 USPQ2D 1827, 1834 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: DAHMANI et al. (W. I. P. O. Patent Application Publication WO2022109385A1): Teaches a “monitoring system” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention. Yen (W. I. P. O. Patent Application Publication WO2021179433A1): Teaches a “box” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention. Lee (South Korea Patent Application Publication KR102121282B1): Teaches a “box” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention. Kim (South Korea Patent Application Publication KR200489278Y1): Teaches a “gift box” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention. Lee (South Korea Patent Application Publication KR20190011516A): Teaches a “gift box” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention. Mayer et al. (U. S. Patent Application PublicationUS20180072086A1): Teaches a “holder” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention. Lengsfield (U. S. Patent US1544463A): Teaches a “box” with similar characteristics as the claimed invention. Contact Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCOS JAVIER RODRIGUEZ MOLINA whose telephone number is (571) 272-8947. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30 AM to 5:30 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, ANTHONY D. STASHICK can be reached on (571) 272-4561. 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. /M.J.R.M./ /Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 17, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 05, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Feb 06, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jun 26, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 26, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 09, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 09, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 03, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 31, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600537
DISPENSING CLOSURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595098
FLUID SAMPLE CONTAINER CAP
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576313
Device to Releasably Secure Pickleballs
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570455
PROTECTIVE BRACKET AND USING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565365
SOLVENT TUBE MANAGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
77%
With Interview (+25.5%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 145 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month