Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/237,370

TRAVEL WATCH STAND

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 23, 2023
Priority
Sep 01, 2022 — provisional 63/403,203
Examiner
MILLNER, MONICA E
Art Unit
3632
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Wolf 1834
OA Round
3 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
878 granted / 1132 resolved
+25.6% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
1167
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
63.9%
+23.9% vs TC avg
§102
17.0%
-23.0% vs TC avg
§112
13.6%
-26.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1132 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/17/26 has been entered. Response to Amendment Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 12, 30 and 42 are amended. Claims 3, 7-11, 14-16, 18-19, 22-25 and 29 are cancelled. Claim 46 is new. Claim 20 is withdrawn. 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. Claim(s) 1, 30-35, 37, 17, 21 and 41, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 1,615,324 to Bulova in view of US 20100116710 to Huang et al. Regarding claim 1, Bulova ‘324 discloses a collapsible watch stand assembly, comprising: a base 3 with a bottom configured to rest on a horizontal surface and a top with an opening formed therein (fig. 1); a watch holder 6/7/8 configured to hold a wristwatch in a viewable orientation above the base 3, the watch holder 6/7/8 having a top surface for supporting the wristwatch and a bottom; an elongate support arm 5 with a first end coupled to the base 3 and a second end rotatably coupled to the watch holder 6/7/8 (figs 2-3); and wherein the watch stand assembly has a first configuration in which the support arm 5 rotates downwardly along a folding path that directs the support arm inside the opening in the base 3 for storage, and a second configuration with the watch holder 6/7/8 elevated to a position mostly above base 3 and held in position by the support arm 5. Bulova ‘324 is silent as to the first end of the support arm 5 being rotatably coupled to the base. However, Huang ‘710 teaches a collapsible stand including a base 11 with a support holder 122, and a support arm 12 with a first end 121b rotatably coupled to the base 11 and a second end rotatably coupled to the support holder 122, where in a second configuration the holder 122 is elevated to a position above base 11 and held in position by the support arm 12. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify arm 5 of Bulova ‘324 with the lower rotatable connection to the base, as taught by Huang ‘710, in order to permit pivotal movement of the arm between storage and support positions while improving compact folding and adjustability of the supported object while effectively supporting the holder above a base in a support configuration for better viewing and easier access, as needed. Regarding claim 30, Bulova ‘324 discloses a collapsible watch stand assembly, comprising: a base 3 with a bottom configured to rest on a horizontal surface and a top; a watch holder 6/7/8 configured to hold a wristwatch in a viewable orientation above the base 3, the watch holder having a top surface 7 for supporting the wristwatch and a bottom 8; a support arm 5 with a first end coupled to the base 8 and a second end rotatably coupled to the watch holder (via hinge – figs 2-3 and pg. 1, lines 33-34); and wherein the watch stand assembly has a first configuration with the bottom of the watch holder lying flat against the base (pg. 1, line 30) and the watch holder facing up, and a second configuration with the watch holder elevated to a position mostly above base 3 and held in position by the support arm 5 (fig. 1 – pg. 1, lines 31-34). Bulova ‘324 is silent as to the first end of the support arm 5 being rotatably coupled to the base. However, Huang ‘710 teaches a collapsible stand including a base 11 with a support holder 122, and a support arm 12 with a first end 121b rotatably coupled to the base 11 and a second end rotatably coupled to the support holder 122, where in a second configuration the holder 122 is elevated to a position above base 11 and held in position by the support arm 12. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify arm 5 of Bulova ‘324 with the lower rotatable connection to the base, as taught by Huang ‘710, in order to permit pivotal movement of the arm between storage and support positions while improving compact folding and adjustability of the supported object, while effectively supporting the holder above a base in a support configuration for better viewing and easier access, as needed. Regarding claim 31, Bulova ‘324, as modified, discloses, wherein the base 3 has an outer perimeter, and the bottom 8 of the watch holder 6/7/8 is disposed completely within the outer perimeter when the watch stand assembly is in the first configuration (pg. 1, line 30). Regarding claim 32, Bulova ‘324, as modified, discloses, wherein an elongated opening is formed in the top of the base 3, and the support arm 5 is received into the elongated opening when the watch stand assembly 6/7/8 is in the first configuration. Regarding claim 33, Bulova ‘324, as modified, discloses, wherein the first end of the support arm 5 is rotatably coupled to the base 3 (as modified by Huang ‘710) inside the elongated opening. Regarding claim 34, Bulova ‘324, as modified, discloses wherein the second end of the support arm 5 is rotatably coupled to the bottom of the watch holder 6/7/8 by a flange extending downward from the bottom of the watch holder and rotatably coupled to the support arm 6, and wherein the support arm 5 and the flange are received into the elongated opening and the support arm 5 resides completely within the elongated opening when the watch stand assembly is in the first configuration. PNG media_image1.png 217 277 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 35, Bulova ‘324, as modified, discloses, wherein the second end of the support arm 5 is rotatably coupled to the bottom of the watch holder 6/7/8 (figs 2-3 – via hinge). Regarding claim 37, Bulova ‘324, as modified, discloses, wherein the support arm 5 completely resides within the elongated opening (in base 3 – fig. 1) and is substantially covered by the watch holder 6/7/8 when the watch stand assembly is in the first configuration (pg. 1, line 30). Regarding claim 17, Bulova ‘324, as modified, where Huang ‘710 discloses, wherein the support arm 12 is rotatably coupled to the support holder 122 and the base 11 at laterally off-center locations (fig. 1). Regarding claim 21, Bulova ‘324, as modified, discloses, wherein the base 3 is covered with a soft leather or fabric material (pg. 1, lines 28-30 – fig. 1). Regarding claim 41, Bulova ‘324, as modified, discloses, wherein the watch holder 6/7/8 includes a padded cushion 7 to provide a contact surface for supporting the wristwatch in a viewable orientation. Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 1,615,324 to Bulova in view of US 20100116710 to Huang et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US D1,026,511 to Lean. Regarding claim 12, Bulova ‘324, as modified, discloses a base having an opening with a watch stand assembly that moves between a first and second configuration. The base 3 has a dimension, but is silent as to a storage tray sufficiently dimensioned to receive small jewelry items with the storage tray being separated from the opening by a dividing wall. However, Lean ‘511 teaches a base having an opening and that includes a storage tray sufficiently dimensioned to receive small jewelry items when, the storage tray being separated from the opening by a dividing wall (as annotated below). PNG media_image2.png 321 424 media_image2.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the base of Bulova ‘324 with the diving wall and storage tray taught in Lean ‘511 in order to make room to store other objects with the base in order to save space and enhance organization. Regarding claim 13, Bulova ‘324, as modified, where Lean ‘324 discloses wherein the storage tray has side walls sloped at an angle to facilitate removing contents from the tray with a single hand movement (as annotated above). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 42-45, 26-28 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: note the current claim amendments to claim 42, specifically the arm configuration and functioning relative to the base and holder. Claims 2, 4-6, 36, 38-40 and 46 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant is advised to correct claim numbering and dependencies to ensure compliance with 37 CFR 1.75(c); as presented, the claims do not clearly refer back to base claims, complicating examination potentially delaying prosecution or issuance. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA E MILLNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7507. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:00pm. 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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. /MONICA E MILLNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 23, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Aug 11, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 17, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Apr 17, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
May 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12638130
Foldable Magnetic Stand Device
2y 1m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12633642
ANTENNA SUPPORT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12631287
MAGNETIC SPHERICAL TRIPOD HEAD AND TRIPOD HEAD ASSEMBLY
1y 10m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12623358
TRANSFER BLADE FOR ROBOT
3y 11m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12623101
ANCHOR DEVICES FOR FALL PROTECTION
2y 1m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.0%)
1y 11m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1132 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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