Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/311,897

WHEEL MANUFACTURING DEVICE AND WHEEL MANUFACTURING METHOD

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
May 04, 2023
Priority
May 23, 2022 — JP 2022-084056
Examiner
TEKA, ABIY
Art Unit
3745
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Honda Motor Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
575 granted / 679 resolved
+14.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
695
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
52.0%
+12.0% vs TC avg
§102
32.3%
-7.7% vs TC avg
§112
14.0%
-26.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 679 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 1-14 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 in line 9 recites “the segment.” However, it is unclear which segment applicant is referring to since there are polarity of segments previously recited. Claims 2-14 are also rejected for being dependent on a rejected base claim. Allowable subject matter Claims 1-14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the 112-rejection stated above including all the limitations of the base claims and all the intervening claims. Regarding claims 1-14 Yada (JP 2017210035 A) teaches the exact wheel that is pertinent to applicant’s claimed invention. Yada teaches a wheel having an annular core body (32) configured by a plurality of arc-shaped segments (34) joined to each other and a plurality of free rollers (60) rotatably provided around an annular axis of the core body (32) (Fig 1). Yada is silent about the structures of the wheel manufacturing device. For instance, Yada is silent regarding the wheel manufacturing device comprising: a holder that comprises a center jig having a circular outer contour and holds the segments in a state of butting against each other on an outer periphery of the center jig; and a laser welder that welds adjacent segments by irradiating a laser, wherein the laser welder sets an optical axis of the laser in a direction orthogonal to an outer peripheral surface of the segment when welding a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the segment away from a central axis of the annular axis, and sets the optical axis in a direction inclined away from the central axis with respect to the direction orthogonal to the outer peripheral surface of the segment when welding a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the segment close to the central axis. However, Denney (US 20130088074 A1) discloses a wheel manufacturing device having a holder comprising a center jig (101) and a laser welder (305) that welds adjacent segments by irradiating a laser (Fig 3). However, Denney is silent regarding the center jig having a circular outer contour and holds the segments of the wheel in a state of butting against each other on an outer periphery of the center jig. Further, Denney is also silent regarding the location of the optical axis of the laser during particular operations. For instance, Denney is silent regarding the laser welder setting an optical axis of the laser in a direction orthogonal to an outer peripheral surface of the segment when welding a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the segment away from a central axis of the annular axis, and sets the optical axis in a direction inclined away from the central axis with respect to the direction orthogonal to the outer peripheral surface of the segment when welding a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the segment close to the central axis. Similarly, Smith (US 4,326,118) teaches a laser beam welding apparatus having a center jig (39) that holds welded workpiece. However, Smith also remains silent regarding the center jig having a circular outer contour and holds the segments in a state of butting against each other on an outer periphery of the center jig. Smith is also silent regarding the location of the optical axis of the laser during particular operations. For instance, Smith is silent regarding the laser welder setting an optical axis of the laser in a direction orthogonal to an outer peripheral surface of the segment when welding a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the segment away from a central axis of the annular axis, and sets the optical axis in a direction inclined away from the central axis with respect to the direction orthogonal to the outer peripheral surface of the segment when welding a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the segment close to the central axis. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIY TEKA whose telephone number is (571)272-9804. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11-9 PM. 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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-8648. 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. /ABIY TEKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 04, 2023
Application Filed
May 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12630132
PEDAL SIMULATOR FOR VEHICLE
1y 10m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12630285
LINEAR ACTUATOR
1y 3m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12617454
AGRICULTURAL TRACTOR
1y 1m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12612757
HYDRAULIC SYSTEM FOR WORK MACHINE, WORK MACHINE, AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING HYDRAULIC SYSTEM
3y 7m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12607261
PNEUMATIC PISTON AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME
1y 4m to grant Granted Apr 21, 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
85%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+10.3%)
2y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 679 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