Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 15, 2026
Application No. 18/271,879

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF FABRIC OR LEATHER ARTICLES

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 12, 2023
Priority
Jan 12, 2021 — IT 102021000000398 +1 more
Examiner
WORRELL JR, LARRY D
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Moncler S P A
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allowance Rate
1204 granted / 1455 resolved
+12.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
1469
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.2%
-37.8% vs TC avg
§103
35.4%
-4.6% vs TC avg
§102
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
§112
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1455 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 . 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. Claims 11-20 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 14 recites the limitation "said advancement step". There is insufficient clear antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim and it is unclear as to how the advancement step is quantified so as to have “a submultiple of said advancement step”. Regarding claims 11 and 18, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 11 and 18 recite the broad recitation “fabric or leather articles”, and the claim also recites "particularly of padded articles" which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Also note the indefinite “preferably” statements in claims 12, 13, 15 and 20 which are unclear as to whether the remainder of the statement is exemplary or a required feature of the claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is reminded that all business with the Patent and Trademark Office should be transacted in writing. The action of the Patent and Trademark Office will be based exclusively on the written record in the Office. No attention will be paid to any alleged oral promise, stipulation, or understanding in relation to which there is disagreement or doubt. 37 C.F.R. 1.2 Further it is noted that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F.R. 1.111, including: -The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. -A general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. -Moreover, The prompt development of a clear issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims. Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06, MPEP 714.02. The "disclosure" includes the claims, the specification and the drawings. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANNY WORRELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4997. The examiner can normally be reached on M, W-F. 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /DANNY WORRELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732 ldw
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 2 earlier events
Jul 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 20, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 17, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 25, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 29, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12698580
TUFTING UNIT AND TUFTING MACHINE
1y 6m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12692634
Modular Attachment System Textile with Integrally Knit Slits and Manufacturing Method Thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12686957
NON-SEAMED SHEETING FABRIC HAVING A COOL PORTION AND A WARM PORTION
1y 4m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12686959
SEWING HEAD
1y 2m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12674255
KNITTED TENSILE STRUCTURES
1y 5m to grant Granted Jul 07, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+9.8%)
2y 3m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1455 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