Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/285,972

3/2-WAY VALVE CONCEPT FOR A HYDRAULIC ACTUATION SYSTEM

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Oct 06, 2023
Priority
Apr 07, 2021 — DE 20 2021 105 880.3 +1 more
Examiner
TORRES WILLIAMS, MELANIE
Art Unit
3616
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Ipgate AG
OA Round
2 (Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
663 granted / 783 resolved
+32.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
813
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
39.0%
-1.0% vs TC avg
§102
41.7%
+1.7% vs TC avg
§112
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 783 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. Claim 3 is 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 3 recites the limitation "the first pressure generating device" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claims 3-6, 8-14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 3-6 and 8-14 depend on canceled claims. Claim 3 recites “wherein the first pressure generating device has a double-stroke piston that separates the first working chamber and a second working chamber of the first pressure generating device from one another in a sealing manner”. The recitation is a repeated limitation recited in claim 1 on which claim 3 depends. Claim 16 recites “wherein the piston pump comprises a double-stroke piston”. The recitation is a repeated limitation recited in claim 1 on which claim 16 depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 15, 17 and 18 are allowed. Claim 3-6, 8-14 and 16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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. 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 MELANIE TORRES WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-7127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:00AM-3:00PM. 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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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. /MELANIE TORRES WILLIAMS/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3616 MTWSeptember 8, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 06, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Aug 31, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 11, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12768422
Rotary Damper and Production Method Therefor
2y 11m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12767107
BRAKE DEVICE AND VEHICLE EQUIPPED WITH BRAKE DEVICE
2y 10m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12768409
BRAKE LINING ARRANGEMENT FOR A VEHICLE DISC BRAKE, AND DISC BRAKE FOR A VEHICLE
3y 0m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12760778
METHODS AND DEVICES FOR ABSORBING ENERGY
3y 6m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12760783
Viscous Torsional Vibration Damper or Viscous Torsional Vibration Absorber
2y 10m to grant Granted Oct 13, 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
85%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+11.7%)
2y 6m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 783 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