Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/273,506

DOUBLE-DECK MULTI-SPAN BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION METHOD

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 20, 2023
Priority
Jan 25, 2021 — CN 202110099119.9 +1 more
Examiner
CHU, KATHERINE J
Art Unit
3671
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
China Construction Science And Industry Corporation Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
46%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 46% of resolved cases
46%
Career Allowance Rate
237 granted / 512 resolved
-5.7% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
552
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
88.4%
+48.4% vs TC avg
§102
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
§112
7.4%
-32.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 512 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 . 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. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “positioning stopper” in claim 5 and the “jig frame abutments” in claims 7 and 8 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “140” has been used to designate two different parts in Figure 1. The drawings are objected to because some of the drawings and reference numerals, particularly Figures 1, 2, 4, and 6, have a line quality that is too light to be reproduced and some reference numerals are illegible. The weight of all lines, letters, and numbers must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. See 37 CFR 1.84(l). 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. Specification The Abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the Abstract exceeds the 150-word limit. Additionally, that which is implied does not need to be stated; accordingly, phrases such as “Disclosed in the present disclosure is” and “According to the double-deck bridge construction method of the present disclosure,” can be deleted because they are extraneous and already implied. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). 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 1, and 2-8 through dependency, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites in the last two clauses “a currently constructed span” and “the currently constructed span”. These recitations are indefinite because if something is constructed, the construction is in past tense, i.e. construction has already finished. “Currently” implies it is still happening. It is unclear what Applicant intends “currently” to mean in this method of construction. Did Applicant intend “currently constructed span” to be something along the lines of “span to be constructed next”? Claim Interpretation The claims recite “mounting” for multiple steps. It will be assumed that “mounting” means “putting into position” in every instance, rather than applying different definitions of “mounting” in each instance. In other words, it is assumed that Applicant is not trying to claim “putting into position” with one instance of “mounting” and then, for example, “climbing up on” with another instance of “mounting”. The recitations of “demounting” will be interpreted similarly. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 1 (and claims 2-8 through dependency) would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action. If Applicant amends the claims in any way that changes the scope, allowability will be reconsidered. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. CN 107044090 is cited for teaching a construction method of a double-deck bridge with reusing support beams and brackets from one phase to the next in building the upper bridge deck. CN 112746563 A is cited for teaching a construction method with shifting of a construction platform upward throughout construction. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE J CHU whose telephone number is 571-272-7819. The examiner can normally be reached M-F generally 9:30-5:30. 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, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at 571-272-0547. 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. /KATHERINE J CHU/Examiner, Art Unit 3671 /CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 20, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12674285
FORMWORK, MATRICES, CONCRETE MATRICES AND METHODS OF MANUFACTURE
2y 10m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12624560
CONCRETE SCREEDING DEPTH AND LEVELING TOOL
4y 5m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12595629
SUBSTRATE TEXTURING TOOL WITH MOTORIZED LIFT
3y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577744
DEVICE FOR THWARTING VEHICULAR STUNTS
4y 3m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571177
IMPACT COMPACTOR
4y 0m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
46%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (+20.7%)
2y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 512 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