Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/366,639

STAIR RAILING WITH ADJUSTABLE ANGLE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 07, 2023
Examiner
HALL, ZACHARY A
Art Unit
3678
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Alliedforest Holdings Group Limited
OA Round
2 (Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allow Rate
83 granted / 137 resolved
+8.6% vs TC avg
Strong +50% interview lift
Without
With
+50.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
158
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
47.0%
+7.0% vs TC avg
§102
36.6%
-3.4% vs TC avg
§112
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 137 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 103 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(s) 1, 3-5, and 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goodman (US 2019/0003187 A1) in view of Ooi (US 5,026,028 A). Regarding claim 1, Goodman discloses a stair railing, comprising: at least two fixed vertical posts (106 in Fig. 1); at least one horizontal rail (102) connected to the vertical post through a movable connecting mechanism (108 and 110), so that the horizontal rail is rotatable in relation to the fixed vertical post (see Fig. 3C); wherein the movable connecting mechanism comprises: an insertion part (410 in Fig. 4 and A in annotated Figure 4 below) with at least a portion of the insertion part being arc-shaped (see Fig. 4), and a receiving part (310 and 312 in Fig. 3B) that has a receiving space compatible with the insertion part (see Fig. 3C); wherein the insertion part comprises: an insertion body (410 in Fig. 4), which is cylindrical and extends along an axis direction (see Fig. 4), and a connector (A in annotated Figure 4 below), wherein one end of the connector is rigidly connected to the insertion body (see Fig. 4), and wherein the receiving part comprises: a receiving body (310 and 312), wherein the receiving body is provided with a curved recess which is configured to form the receiving space (see Figs. 3B-3C) and a connecting gap (C in annotated Figure 3B below) located on a surface of the receiving body (see Fig. 3B), wherein the connecting gap is connecting with the curved recess and configured to allow the connector to pass through (see Figs. 3B-3C). Goodman fails to disclose as claimed that the other end of the connector is rigidly connected to the horizontal rail; and wherein the receiving part comprises: a receiving body rigidly connected to the top of the vertical post. Goodman does disclose that the connector (A in annotated Figure 4 above) is rigidly connected to the vertical post (106, see Fig. 1) but fails to disclose as claimed that the connector is rigidly connected to the horizontal rail. However, Ooi teaches a railing comprising an insertion part (12a and B in annotated Figure 1 below) having an insertion body (12a), a receiving part (2), and a connector (B in annotated Figure 1 below) with one end rigidly connected to the insertion body and the other end rigidly connected to the horizontal rail (10), in order to provide a connection that allows the horizontal rail and receiving part to be turned freely up and down relative to one another (see Column 3 lines 19-33) and further to allow the smaller insertion body to be rigidly attached to the rail, making the rail a lighter weight component and reducing forces applied to the rail. Applicant is reminded that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stair railing of Goodman, with Ooi, such that it comprising the insertion body of Goodman rigidly attached to the rail of Goodman and the receiving part of Goodman rigidly attached to the post of Goodman as shown by example in Fig. 1 of Ooi, in order to provide a connection that allows the horizontal rail and receiving part to be turned freely up and down relative to one another (see Column 3 lines 19-33 of Ooi) and further to allow the smaller insertion body to be rigidly attached to the rail of Goodman, making the rail a lighter weight component and reducing forces applied to the rail. Accordingly, the combination of Goodman and Ooi teaches as claimed that the other end of the connector (A in annotated Figure 4 below) is rigidly connected to the horizontal rail (102 of Goodman); and wherein the receiving part comprises: a receiving body (310 and 312 of Goodman) rigidly connected to the top of the vertical post (106 of Goodman, see Fig. 1 of Goodman). PNG media_image1.png 491 606 media_image1.png Greyscale Figure 1. Annotated Figure 4. PNG media_image2.png 415 644 media_image2.png Greyscale Figure 2. Annotated Figure 1. PNG media_image3.png 442 348 media_image3.png Greyscale Figure 3. Annotated Figure 3B. Regarding claim 3, the combination of Goodman and Ooi teaches wherein the cylindrical insertion body (410 of Goodman) is provided with a gap (see Fig. 4 of Goodman) extending along the axis direction and located opposite the connector (A in annotated Figure 4 above, see Fig. 4 of Goodman). Regarding claim 4, the combination of Goodman and Ooi teaches wherein the cylindrical insertion body (410 of Goodman) is hollow and provided with a predefined thickness (see Figs. 3C-4 of Goodman). Regarding claim 5, the combination of Goodman and Ooi teaches wherein the connector (A in Annotated Figure 4 above) extends along the axis direction and reaches both ends of the cylindrical insertion body (410 of Goodman, see Fig. 4 of Goodman). Regarding claim 7, the combination of Goodman and Ooi teaches wherein the connecting gap (C in annotated Figure 3B above) has a predefined width (see Fig. 3B of Goodman), so that the connector (A in annotated Figure 4 above) is allowed to swing within a predetermined angular range (see Fig. 3C of Goodman). Regarding claim 8, the combination of Goodman and Ooi teaches wherein the receiving body (310 and 312 of Goodman) is provided with a first surface (D in annotated Figure 3B below) rigidly connected to the vertical post (106 of Goodman, as taught by Ooi) and a second surface (E in annotated Figure 3B below) where the connecting gap is located (see Fig. 3B of Goodman). PNG media_image4.png 682 255 media_image4.png Greyscale Figure 4. Annotated Figure 3B. PNG media_image5.png 398 381 media_image5.png Greyscale Figure 5. Annotated Figure 3B. Regarding claim 9, the combination of Goodman and Ooi teaches wherein the receiving body (310 and 312 of Goodman) is provided with a first lateral surface and a second lateral surface (side surfaces shown in Fig. 3A of Goodman), and the curved recess traverses the receiving body along the axis direction to form two circular openings on the first lateral surface and second lateral surface (see Figs. 3A-3C of Goodman). Regarding claim 10, the combination of Goodman and Ooi teaches wherein the receiving part (310 and 312 of Goodman) further comprises at least two cover plates (see NOTE below) detachably fixed to the first lateral surface and second lateral surface to cover the circular openings (see Figs. 3A-3C of Goodman). NOTE: The at least two cover plates are the washers shown in Fig. 3A of Goodman that accompany the screws 304 of Goodman. See in paragraph [0037] of Goodman that two hinge screws can be used, and therefore two washers can be used. Accordingly, the washers are considered the cover plates. Regarding claim 11, the combination of Goodman and Ooi teaches wherein the horizontal rail (102 of Goodman) comprises a horizontal rail body (502 of Goodman) with a predefined length (see Fig. 5A) and a handrail portion (504 of Goodman) positioned on an upper surface of the horizontal rail body (see Fig. 5A of Goodman); wherein a lower surface of the horizontal rail body is connected to the vertical post (106 of Goodman) through the movable connecting mechanism (108 and 110 of Goodman, see Figs. 1 and 5A of Goodman). Regarding claim 12, the combination of Goodman and Ooi teaches wherein the stair railing (see Fig. 1 of Goodman) is consisting of a single horizontal rail (102 in Fig. 1 of Goodman) and two fixed vertical posts (106 of Goodman), and the two fixed vertical posts are connected to respective ends of the horizontal rail through the movable connecting mechanism (108 and 110 of Goodman, see Fig. 1 of Goodman of Goodman). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 15 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant's arguments filed 15 October 2025, page 2, recites: “…Regarding the § 102 rejection over Goodman…”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner notes that the claims have been amended such that no 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections are set forth in the Final Office Action. Therefore, any comments regarding a 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection are moot. Applicant's arguments filed 15 October 2025, page 3, recites: “…Firstly, in Goodman, the receiving space (rotation channel 214/314) is part of the railing leaf (200/300) attached to the movable horizontal rail, and the insertion part (railing leaf engaging 410) is attached to the fixed post. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have no motivation to invert the fundamental mechanical relationship disclosed in the primary reference. The proposed modification contradicts the core architectural design of Goodman…”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is reminded that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955). Further, as stated previously, modifying the relationship of Goodman in such a way as suggested by Ooi, would make the rail a lighter weight component and reduce forces applied to the rail. Applicant's arguments filed 15 October 2025, page 3, recites: “…Secondly, Ooi Does Not Disclose or Suggest a "Receiving Body with a Curved Recess"…”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner relies on Ooi to show that it is known to have the receiving part fixed to the post, and to have the insertion part fixed to the rail. Examiner relies on Ooi to support a mere reversal of parts, not to teach the receiving part structure of Ooi onto that of Goodman. Applicant's arguments filed 15 October 2025, page 3, recites: “…Thirdly, replacing this parallel-plate clamping structure with a monolithic "receiving body having a curved recess" would destroy these core functions of Ooi's device…”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As stated above, Examiner relies on Ooi to show that it is known to have the receiving part fixed to the post, and to have the insertion part fixed to the rail. Examiner relies on Ooi to support a mere reversal of parts, not to teach the receiving part structure of Ooi onto that of Goodman. Applicant's arguments filed 15 October 2025, page 4, recites: “…Fourthly, base on the same reason, the combination suggested by the Examiner (using Goodman's insertion body and a modified version of Ooi's strut bracket attached to a post) would result in an assembly featuring a clamping structure with parallel plates, not a "receiving body having a curved recess.". Thus, the combination fails to produce a key structural limitation required by amended claim 1…”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As stated above, Examiner relies on Ooi to support a mere reversal of parts, not to teach the receiving part structure of Ooi onto that of Goodman. 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 ZACHARY A HALL whose telephone number is (571)272-5907. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 8:00am to 4:00pm. 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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571-270-5281. 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. /ZAH/ Examiner, Art Unit 3678 /AMBER R ANDERSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 07, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 15, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595661
LENGTH ADJUSTABLE RAILING PANEL WITH REMOVABLE UPRIGHT END RAILS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576503
CONNECTION ASSEMBLY FOR A HAND-GUIDED MACHINE TOOL AND HAND-GUIDED MACHINE TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12560198
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MULTI-DOF CROSS-PIVOT FLEXURE BEARING WITH ENHANCED RANGE AND ENHANCED LOAD CAPACITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12560189
JOINT STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12544692
STRUCTURE FOR ASSEMBLING AND DISASSEMBLING DIRT SUCTION HEAD TO/FROM FILTER BAG
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
61%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+50.5%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 137 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