Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/256,613

METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SHOCKABSORBING LANYARD FOR EASY LENGTH ADJUSTMENT OF POY

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jun 08, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, UYEN T
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Eastern Industrial Corp.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
38%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
77%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 38% of cases
38%
Career Allow Rate
105 granted / 278 resolved
-32.2% vs TC avg
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+39.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
53 currently pending
Career history
331
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
44.7%
+4.7% vs TC avg
§102
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§112
32.4%
-7.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 278 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/08/2023, 11/17/2023 and 03/18/2025 is acknowledged. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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. Claims 2-11 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 2 recites “…the tube fabric produced by weaving the fiber yarn and the rubber yarn as warp and the fiber yarn as weft…” in lines 3-4. It is unclear if there is one fiber yarn which functions both as a warp yarn and a weft yarn at the first end portion or not. For the purpose of applying art, the limitation is interpreted as there are two different kinds of fiber yarns, which are warp fiber yarns and weft fiber yarns. Claim 2 recites “…produced by weaving the fiber yarn as warp and weft” in lines 6-7 For the same reason, it is unclear if there is one fiber yarn which functions both as a warp yarn and a weft yarn. Claim 2 then recites “the rubber yarn as warp woven with the fiber yarn and as core yarn woven without the fiber yarn” in lines 7-8. If there are two different kinds of fiber yarns, it is unclear which fiber yarn the Applicant wants to mention. For the purpose of applying art, the limitation is interpreted as there are two different kinds of fiber yarns, which are warp fiber yarns and weft fiber yarns; and the rubber yarn as warp woven with the weft fiber yarns and the rubber yarn as core yarn woven without the weft fiber yarn. Claim 2 recites “…produced by weaving the fiber yarn and the rubber yarn as warp and the fiber yarn as weft…” in lines 10-11. For the same reason, it is unclear if there is one fiber yarn which functions both as a warp yarn and a weft yarn and it is unclear which fiber yarn the Applicant wants to mention. Claim 3 recites “the fiber yarns” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 5 recites “the sets of fiber yarns” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Any remaining claims are rejected as depending from a rejected base claim. In the art rejections below the claims have been treated as best understood by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claims 1-2 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Dell (US 6533066) in view of KR101237196 (hereinafter KR’196). Regarding claim 1, O’Dell teaches a method for manufacturing a shock-absorbing lanyard (fig. 25B, abstract) for easy length adjustment of partially oriented yarn (POY) (column 4, lines 15-18), comprising: (a) weaving a safety tube band (fig. 3, column 1, lines 45-50) which is a tube fabric woven (column 4, lines 13-14) using fiber yarn (fig. 25B, column 1, lines 50-51) and elastic yarn (fig. 25B, elastic yarns 87), and placing a core material (fig. 25B, column 7, line 18, POY fibers 36) in the safety tube band at the same time, wherein the core material is made of plurality of POY (fig. 25B, line 18, POY fibers 36) and stretches in a longitudinal direction to absorb shock (column 1, lines 55-56); (b) adjusting a length of the core material after weaving the safety tube band (column 4, lines 15-18); and (c) combining the safety tube band with the core material to form a combination (fig. 25B, abstract). O’Dell does not clearly teach the elastic yarn is rubber yarn. However, in the same field of endeavor, KR’196 teaches weaving a safety tube band which is a tube fabric woven using rubber yarn (figs. 4-6, warp yarns 204 are rubber yarns). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the elastic yarn of O’Dell with rubber yarn as taught by KR’196 for the benefit of providing elasticity in the upper and lower fabrics of the weaving tube band (KR’196, summary of the invention). Regarding claim 2, the modified method O’Dell-KR’196 teaches wherein the safety tube band includes: a first end portion (O’Dell, fig. 5, column 4, lines 10-17, end section 26) which is the tube fabric produced by weaving the fiber yarn and the rubber yarn as warp (O’Dell, fig. 25B, fibers 80, 81, 82, 83, and elastic yarn 87 are warp yarns) and the fiber yarn as weft (O’Dell, fig. 25B, weft yarns 1-8) and is flat in the longitudinal direction (O’Dell, fig. 5, column 4, lines 10-17); a central portion (O’Dell, fig. 5, a tubular weave section 32) which is the tube fabric produced by weaving the fiber yarn as warp and weft and the rubber yarn as warp woven with the fiber yarn (O’Dell, fig. 25B) and as core yarn (O’Dell, fig. 25B, elastic yarn 87 is provided at core material) woven without the fiber yarn, repeatedly arranged at a predetermined interval (O’Dell, column 7, lines 12-13), and is extended from the first end portion and corrugated in the longitudinal direction (O’Dell, fig. 25B); and a second end portion (O’Dell, fig. 4, opposite end 38) which is the tube fabric produced by weaving the fiber yarn and the rubber yarn as warp and the fiber yarn as weft (O’Dell, fig. 25B), and is extended from the central portion and flat in the longitudinal direction (O’Dell, column 4, lines 5-22), and wherein the step (a) comprises continuously weaving the first end portion, the central portion and the second end portion of the safety tube band in a sequential order (O’Dell, fig. 5). Regarding claim 9, the modified method O’Dell-KR’196 teaches the step (a) comprises weaving a first end portion of the plurality of POY of the core material with the first end portion of the safety tube band, and continuously weaving the central portion and the second end portion of the safety tube band in a sequential order, wherein the plurality of POY is arranged in parallel in the longitudinal direction inside the central portion and the second end portion of the safety tube band, and an end of a second end portion of the plurality of POY is disposed outside of the second end portion of the safety tube band (O’Dell, figs. 3-5, column 5, lines 13-48). Regarding claim 10, the modified method O’Dell-KR’196 teaches the step (b) comprises pulling the end of the second end portion of the plurality of POY out of the second end portion of the safety tube band, and cutting the second end portion of the plurality of POY so that a length of the safety tube band is longer than a total stretched length of the plurality of POY (O’Dell, column 5, lines 13-48). Regarding claim 11, the modified method O’Dell-KR’196 teaches the step (c) comprises sewing the second end portion of the safety tube band and the second end portion of the plurality of POY to form the combination (O’Dell, column 5, lines 13-48). Claims 3-4 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Dell (US 6533066) and KR101237196, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Chang (US 6283167). Regarding claim 3, the modified method O’Dell-KR’196 teaches the rubber yarn which forms the central portion of the safety tube band includes: first rubber yarn (O’Dell, fig. 25B, elastic yarn 87) as warp which is woven over a fiber yarn (O’Dell, fig. 25B, pick 5) as weft disposed and continuously arranged in an upper fabric of the tube fabric which forms the safety tube band and interposed between the upper fabric and a lower fabric of the tube fabric which forms the safety tube band to a predetermined distance, wherein this process is repeatedly performed (annotated O’Dell fig. 25B below); and second rubber yarn (O’Dell, fig. 25B, elastic yarn 87) as warp which is woven under the plurality of fiber yarns (O’Dell, fig. 25B, picks 8, 10, 12) as weft disposed and continuously arranged in the lower fabric of the tube fabric which forms the safety tube band and interposed between the upper fabric and the lower fabric of the tube fabric which forms the safety tube band to the predetermined distance, wherein this process is repeatedly performed (annotated O’Dell fig. 25B below). PNG media_image1.png 291 571 media_image1.png Greyscale The modified method O’Dell-KR’196 does not clearly teach the first rubber yarn is woven over a plurality of the fiber yarns. However, in the same field of making a tubular woven fabric woven from warp yarns and weft yarns, Chang teaches the warp yarn (fig. 3, waft yarn 22) is woven over a plurality of fiber yarns (fig. 3, weft yarn 24, column 4, lines 12-20); the warp yarn can be elastic (column 4, lines 12-20). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified method O’Dell-KR’196 with the teaching that the elastic warp yarn is woven over a plurality of the fiber yarns as taught by Chang for the benefit of providing a greater flexibility, stretchability to the tubular woven fabric in comparison with plain weave (1x1 weave). Regarding claim 4, the modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang teaches does not teach the first rubber yarn is woven over two to four fiber yarns as weft, and wherein the second rubber yarn is woven under two to four fiber yarns as weft. However, Chang teaches the first elastic yarn (fig. 3, waft yarn 22) is woven over two to four fiber yarns as weft, and wherein the second elastic yarn (fig. 3, waft yarn 22) is woven under two to four fiber yarns as weft (fig. 3, column 4, lines 12-20). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang with the teaching that the first elastic yarn is woven over two to four fiber yarns as weft, and wherein the second elastic yarn is woven under two to four fiber yarns as weft as taught by Chang for the benefit of providing a greater flexibility to the tubular woven fabric. Regarding claim 6, the modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang teaches the first rubber yarn and the second rubber yarn are the core yarn interposed between the upper fabric and the lower fabric to the distance corresponding to an interval (O’Dell, fig. 25B). The modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang does not teach the interval is between ten to fifteen fiber yarns as weft. However, KR’196 teaches the interval is between ten to fifteen fiber yarns as weft (machine translation, para. [0030], the slope 204 is between 6 picks (weft in transverse direction) and 24 picks). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang with the interval is between ten to fifteen fiber yarns as weft as taught by KR’196 for the benefit of providing wrinkles in the tube fabric so that the worker who wears the belt can perform the work activity conveniently at work (KR’196, machine translation, para. [0027]). Regarding claim 7, the modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang teaches a first position and a second position repeat in an alternating manner along the longitudinal direction, the first position at which the first rubber yarn is woven over a fiber yarn as weft disposed in the upper fabric, and the second position at which the second rubber yarn is woven under a fiber yarn as weft disposed in the lower fabric (O’Dell, fig. 25B). The modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang does not teach the first rubber yarn is woven over the plurality of fiber yarns and the second rubber yarn is woven under the plurality of fiber yarns. However, Chang teaches the first warp yarn (fig. 3, waft yarn 22) is woven over a plurality of fiber yarns (fig. 3, weft yarn 24, column 4, lines 12-20) in the upper fabric; the second warp yarn is woven under the plurality of fiber yarns in the lower fabric (fig. 3) and the warp yarn can be elastic (column 4, lines 12-20). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang with the teaching that the first elastic warp yarn is woven over a plurality of fiber yarns in the upper fabric and the second elastic warp yarn is woven under the plurality of fiber yarns in the lower fabric as taught by Chang for the benefit of providing a greater flexibility and stretchability to the tubular woven fabric in comparison with plain weave (1x1 weave). Regarding claim 8, the modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang teaches the first end portion and the second end portion of the safety tube band are flat woven (O’Dell, fig. 5) by: repeatedly weaving the first rubber yarn which forms the upper fabric with the fiber yarn as weft disposed in the upper fabric in an alternating manner (O’Dell, fig. 25B), and extending the second rubber yarn which forms the lower fabric and repeatedly weaving the second rubber yarn with the fiber yarn as weft disposed in the lower fabric in an alternating manner (O’Dell; fig. 25B). Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Dell (US 6533066), KR101237196 and Chang (US 6283167), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of KR101797672 (hereinafter KR’672). Regarding claim 5, the modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang does not clearly teach three to eight fiber yarns arranged in parallel in the longitudinal direction form a set of fiber yarns, and wherein one or two first rubber yarns or second rubber yarns are repeatedly arranged in parallel between the sets of fiber yarns. However, in the same field of endeavor, KR’672 teaches three to eight fiber yarns (fig. 4, yarns 110) arranged in parallel in the longitudinal direction form a set of fiber yarns, and wherein one or two first rubber yarns or second rubber yarns (fig. 4, yarns 155) are repeatedly arranged in parallel between the sets of fiber yarns (fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified method O’Dell-KR’196-Chang with the teaching that one or two first rubber yarns or second rubber yarns are repeatedly arranged in parallel between the sets of fiber yarns as taught by KR’672 so that the tubular woven fabric can have both elasticity from the elastic yarn and abrasion resistance from high-strength fiber yarns. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UYEN THI THAO NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 AM-4:30 PM EST. 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, Khoa Huynh can be reached at 571-272-4888. 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. /UYEN T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 08, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599195
FULLY CONVERTIBLE HIGH HEEL-TO-FLAT SHOE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12577723
STEAM PRESSING DEVICE WITH STEAM PLATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564231
CHARGER POSITIONING BELT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12550959
APPAREL WITH ADAPTIVE FIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12546059
Handheld Garment Steamer and Water Tank Thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
38%
Grant Probability
77%
With Interview (+39.1%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 278 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