Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/245,003

CHARGING POLE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 13, 2023
Priority
Sep 11, 2020 — DE 10 2020 123 798.7 +1 more
Examiner
DIAO, M BAYE
Art Unit
2859
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Me Energy GmbH
OA Round
2 (Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
1266 granted / 1446 resolved
+19.6% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1471
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
§103
56.3%
+16.3% vs TC avg
§102
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
§112
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1446 resolved cases

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 . Response to Amendment Acknowledgement is made of amendment filed on 05/10/2026 in which claims 1-4,6-17 have been amended, claim 5 has been canceled while claim 18 remains as previously presented. By this amendment, claims 1-4,6-18 are still pending in the application. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4,6-18 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. Drawings The drawings were received on 05/10/2026. These drawings are accepted. Drawings The drawings(Fig. 3) filed on 03/23/2023 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations of, “…wherein, during a charging process at a time t33 PB(t33)>PE(t33)…”as recited in amended claim 13, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 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 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. Claims 13-15 are 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. The limitations of, “…wherein, during a charging process at a time t33 PB(t33)>PE(t33)…”as recited in amended claim 13 is not shown in Fig. 3 and is contrary to what was originally disclosed in the specification, page 8, line 2. Claims 14-15 depend directly from claim 13 and therefore are rejected for the same reasons. 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. Claims 13-15 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. The limitations of, “…wherein, during a charging process at a time t33 PB(t33)>PE(t33)…”as recited in amended claim 13 are not shown in Fig. 3 and is contrary to what was originally disclosed in the specification(see page 8 of originally filed specification, line 2). Claims 14-15 depend directly from claim 13 and therefore are rejected for the same reasons. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-4,6-12,16-18 are objected but are otherwise allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and (a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph and first paragraph, set forth in this Office action. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M'BAYE DIAO whose telephone number is (571)272-6127. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 10:00AM-6:30PM and OFF most of the time Friday when working IFP. 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, DREW A DUNN can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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'BAYE DIAO Primary Examiner Art Unit 2859 /M BAYE DIAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 June 8, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 13, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
May 10, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 10, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12683417
ELECTRICAL APPARATUS AND APPARATUS SYSTEM
3y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12683214
THERMAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DC FAST CHARGE
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12683205
ENERGY STORAGE CANOPY
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12676365
SHORT CIRCUIT BASED PUNCTURE DETECTION FOR BEV PROTECTION PLATES
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12662019
AUTOMOBILE BATTERY THERMAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, AUTOMOBILE THERMAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, AND ELECTRIC AUTOMOBILE
3y 4m to grant Granted Jun 23, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+3.2%)
2y 4m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1446 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