Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/286,844

DAMPING CARTRIDGE SYSTEM FOR VEHICLE FRONT FORKS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 13, 2023
Examiner
TORRES WILLIAMS, MELANIE
Art Unit
3616
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
ÖHLINS RACING AB
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
628 granted / 742 resolved
+32.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
786
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
37.5%
-2.5% vs TC avg
§102
46.1%
+6.1% vs TC avg
§112
15.1%
-24.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 742 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 30 – Fig. 1A. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 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 11 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 11 recites “a second material” in line 3. The limitation is unclear since there is no previously recited material. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 4-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Morimoto et al. (JP 2011202702 A). Re claim 1, Morimoto et al. disclose a damping cartridge system (10) configured to be arranged in a leg of a vehicle front fork, the damping cartridge system comprising: an inner cartridge tube (21) configured to be coupled to a first part of the vehicle front fork leg, a piston head (23) coupled to a second part of the vehicle front fork leg configured to be moveable relative the first part of the front fork leg, the piston head configured to be moveable inside the inner cartridge tube between a first position and a second position, an outer cartridge tube (60) sized and adapted to at least partly house the inner cartridge tube, characterized in that wherein the outer cartridge tube comprises a plurality of ridges (62) and grooves (63) arranged side-by-side along the axial direction of the outer cartridge tube, thereby forming a corrugated portion for distributing radial forces acting on the damping cartridge system. (Fig. 4, 5-10) Re claim 4, Morimoto et al. disclose wherein ridge (62)of the corrugated portion varies along the axial direction of the corrugated portion. (Fig. 8) Re claim 5, Morimoto et al. disclose wherein the corrugated portion [[(31)]] comprises a helical groove axially extending along the axial direction of the corrugated portion [[(31)]] and/or independent radial grooves arranged side-by-side along the axial direction of the corrugated portion [[(31)]]. Re claim 6, Morimoto et al. disclose wherein the wall thickness of the corrugated portion [[(31)]] is substantially even along the axial direction of the corrugated portion [[(31)]]. Re claim 8, Morimoto et al. disclose, wherein the corrugated portion is arranged such that the piston head, when in the first position, is located within the corrugated portion, and, when in the second position, is located fully outside the corrugated portion. (Fig. 8) Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baldomero et al. (US 6142497). Re claim 1, Baldomero et al. disclose a damping cartridge system configured to be arranged in a leg of a vehicle front fork, the damping cartridge system comprising: an inner cartridge tube (24) configured to be coupled to a first part of the vehicle front fork leg, a piston head (32) coupled to a second part of the vehicle front fork leg configured to be moveable relative the first part of the front fork leg, the piston head configured to be moveable inside the inner cartridge tube between a first position and a second position, an outer cartridge tube (40) sized and adapted to at least partly house the inner cartridge tube, characterized in that wherein the outer cartridge tube comprises a plurality of ridges (42) and grooves arranged side-by-side along the axial direction of the outer cartridge tube, thereby forming a corrugated portion for distributing radial forces acting on the damping cartridge system. Re claim 2, Baldomero et al. disclose wherein at least two grooves of the corrugated portion have groove depths which are different. (Fig. 3-4, Col. 4, lines 35-36) Re claim 3, Baldomero et al. disclose wherein the groove depths of the corrugated portion varies along the axial direction of the corrugated portion. (Fig. 3-4, Col. 4, lines 35-36) 5. Claims 1, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Uchiyama (US 8672306 B2). Re claim 1, Uchiyama discloses a damping cartridge system configured to be arranged in a leg of a vehicle front fork, the damping cartridge system comprising: an inner cartridge tube (35) configured to be coupled to a first part of the vehicle front fork leg, a piston head (37) coupled to a second part of the vehicle front fork leg configured to be moveable relative the first part of the front fork leg, the piston head configured to be moveable inside the inner cartridge tube between a first position and a second position, an outer cartridge tube (46) sized and adapted to at least partly house the inner cartridge tube, characterized in that wherein the outer cartridge tube comprises a plurality of ridges and grooves (35a) arranged side-by-side along the axial direction of the outer cartridge tube, thereby forming a corrugated portion for distributing radial forces acting on the damping cartridge system. (Fig. 5) Re claim 12, Uchiyama discloses wherein the outer cartridge tube (46) comprises a spring receiving portion (39) axially displaced from the corrugated portion, said spring receiving portion adapted for receiving the helical spring (34) when arranged to the cartridge system, wherein the corrugated portion has a first diameter and the spring receiving portion has a second diameter smaller than said first diameter. (Fig. 3) Re claim 15, Uchiyama discloses vehicle comprising: a vehicle front fork (23), the damping cartridge system according to claim 1 (see above) arranged in a leg of said vehicle front fork, and a helical spring (34) configured to counteract the movement of the piston head (37) when moved between the first and second position, said helical spring arranged such that the spring receiving portion of the outer cartridge tube is arranged at least partly inside said helical spring. (Fig. 1) 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. Claim 7, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morimoto et al. (JP 2011202702 A).Uchiyama (US 8672306 B2). Re claim 7, Morimoto et al. do not teach wherein the wall thickness of the corrugated portion is about 0.5-2.5 mm. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to select a wall thickness based on desired specifications. Applicant has not disclosed that the specific range solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the wall thickness would be effective in a range of thicknesses. 9. Claims 11, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchiyama (US 8672306 B2). Re claim 11, Uchiyama et al. do not teach wherein the inner cartridge tube is made from a material comprising aluminum, the second material preferably comprising 95-98% aluminum. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make a damping component from aluminum since it is known for being lightweight. Re claim 13, Uchiyama et al. as modified teach wherein the outer cartridge tube comprises a conical portion connecting the corrugated portion and the spring receiving portion. (Fig. 3) Re claim 14, Uchiyama et al. as modified teach spring protection means arranged on the outside of the spring receiving portion. (Fig. 3) Allowable Subject Matter Claims 9 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ma, Cotter, Lai, Janes, Daner and GB ‘022 teach similar damping systems. 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 Tuesday - Friday 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 MTWJanuary 23, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 13, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583421
DRUM BRAKE WITH ROTATABLE BRAKE SHOE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583547
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETECTING THE SPEED OF A BICYCLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577993
REDUCED PROFILE PISTON ADJUSTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570257
BRAKING SYSTEM FOR A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570370
CONTROL SYSTEM FOR HUMAN-POWERED VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
85%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+12.3%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 742 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