Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/381,090

Speed Square With Highly Visible Level

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 17, 2023
Examiner
GUADALUPE, YARITZA
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
943 granted / 1143 resolved
+14.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
1163
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
37.8%
-2.2% vs TC avg
§102
47.5%
+7.5% vs TC avg
§112
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1143 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Drawings The drawings filed October 17, 2023 are accepted. Abstract The Abstract filed October 17, 2023 is accepted. Specification The specification filed October 17, 2023 has been entered. Claim Objections Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 19 recites the limitation "the spaced pair of rubber balls" in lines 2 and 3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required. 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 21 – 23 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 21 - 23 recite the phrase “the thick heel” which is considered an indefinite term because it is not clear what are the metes and bounds of the phrase. Specifically, it is impossible to quantify what defines a ‘thick heel”. In addition, claims 22 and 23 recite the term “sufficiently” which is also considered indefinite because the metes and bounds of what is considered “sufficiently” cannot be fully ascertained. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 13, 18 and 21 – 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Trigilio (US 6,230,416). With respect to claim 13, Trigilio discloses a square (1) with a level vial (45) comprising a blade (11); a heel (7); a level vial (45); a cushioning member (62); and interacting portions (33, 41, 61) of the blade and heel configured to compress the level vial (45) and cushioning member (62) together when the blade is connected to the heel. PNG media_image1.png 560 624 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 150 890 media_image2.png Greyscale Referring to claim 18, Trigilio sets forth a square wherein the blade includes a notch (33) in a bottom edge of the blade, and wherein the level vial (45) is held at least partially above the heel and within the notch. In regards to claim 21, Trigilio teaches a square wherein the heel (7) is a thick heel having a height that is greater than a height of the level vial (See Figure 1). Regarding claim 22, Trigilio shows a square wherein the thick heel (7) has a depression (33, 41) that is sufficiently deep for fully receiving the level vial within the heel (See Figure 1). With regards to claim 23, Trigilio discloses a square wherein the thick heel has a depression (33, 41) that is sufficiently deep for partially receiving the level vial within the heel (Figure 1). 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. Claims 15 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trigilio (US 2020/0225017 A1). Trigilio discloses a square as recited in paragraph 8 above. Trigilio does not disclose the pair of rubber balls as recited in claims 15 – 17. With respect to claim 15, Trigilio sets forth a square wherein the cushioning member (62) comprises a tensioning spring (Column 4, lines 6 – 9). The use of the particular type of cushioning member claimed by applicant, i.e., rubber balls, absent any criticality, is considered to be nothing more than a choice of engineering skill, choice or design because 1) neither non-obvious nor unexpected results, i.e., results which are different in kind and not in degree from the results of the prior art, will be obtained as long as the level vial is securely retained between the blade and heel, as already suggested by Trigilio, 2) the cushioning member claimed by Applicant and the tensioning spring used by Trigilio are well known alternate types of cushioning members which will perform the same function, if one is replaced with the other, of securely retaining the level vial between the blade and the heel, and 3) the use of the particular type of cushioning member by Applicant is considered to be nothing more than the use of one of numerous and well known alternate types of cushioning members that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been able to provide using routine experimentation in order to securely retain the level vial between the blade and the heel as already suggested by Trigilio. Referring to claims 16 and 17, Trigilio teaches a square wherein the cushioning member/tensioning springs (62) are located around the level vial and adjacent to the heel. Changing the location of the cushioning member from the location shown by Trigilio to a location above or below the level vial and adjacent to the heel, absent any criticality, is only considered to be an obvious modification of Trigilio’s square that a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would be able to provide using routine experimentation since the courts have held that there is no invention in shifting the position if the operation of the device would not be thereby modified. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1 – 12 are allowed. Claims 14, 19, 20 and 24 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. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claims 1 – 12 are allowable because the prior art fails to teach or suggest a square with a level vial comprising a heel of generally parallelepiped shape with an elongated body having top, bottom, front, and back faces, and two ends; a level vial; a cushioning member; fasteners for connecting the first bottom edge of the triangular blade to the top face of the heel; and interacting portions of the triangular blade and the heel configured to compress the level vial and cushioning member together when the first bottom edge of the triangular blade is connected to the top face of the heel in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims. Claim 14, 19, 20 and 24 are allowable because the prior art fails to teach or suggest a square further comprising fasteners for connecting the blade to the heel; wherein the interacting portions of the blade and heel comprise a spaced pair of seats in a bottom edge of the blade for holding the spaced pair of rubber balls above the level vial, and a spaced pair of saddles extending upwardly from a top face of the heel for holding the level vial above the heel and below the spaced pair of rubber balls, the interacting portions of the blade and heel holding the level vial above the heel within the notch; and a removeable bottom plate in the heel, the removable bottom plate being smaller than a bottom face of the heel but sufficiently large for providing access to remove, clean, or replace the level vial without disconnecting the heel from the blade in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references are considered relevant but fail to teach the combination as claimed: Jones (US 11,692,803) discloses a speed square comprising a thick heel (26) but fails to teach the combination as claimed. English (US 6,314,652) discloses a Square tool with a bubble level and a heel but fails to teach the combination as claimed. Butler (US Pub. No. 2016/0047650) discloses a speed square with a blade, a heel and a level vial but fails to teach the combination as claimed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL whose telephone number is (571)272-2244. The examiner can normally be reached Mon -Thu, 8:00am - 6:00pm. 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, Laura E Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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. YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL Primary Examiner Art Unit 2855 December 5, 2025 /YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 17, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601581
Generator Rotor Centering Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603976
FOUNDATION PROJECTION LINE-DRAWING DEVICE AND A LINE-DRAWING METHOD FOR A SPORTS FIELD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595995
ELECTRONIC SCALE RULER AND VERNIER CALIPER, AND USE METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595994
SPOOLED MARKING APPARATUS AND METHODS THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590790
MULTIFUNCTIONAL SPEED SQUARE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
82%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+14.6%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1143 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month