Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 18/382,966

METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR POSITION SENSITIVE SUSPENSION DAMPING

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Oct 23, 2023
Priority
May 31, 2011 — provisional 61/491,858 +3 more
Examiner
LANE, NICHOLAS J
Art Unit
3616
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Fox Factory Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allowance Rate
611 granted / 930 resolved
+13.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
972
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
44.4%
+4.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
§112
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 930 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,796,028. This is a statutory double patenting rejection. Claim 1 of the present application and claim 1 of the ‘028 patent are identical. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS J LANE whose telephone number is (571)270-5988. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, 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. /NICHOLAS J LANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 December 29, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 23, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection (signed) — §101
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704160
HYDRAULIC MACHINE COMPRISING A STACK OF DISCS ACTED ON BY A PUSH ROD
3y 11m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12686375
ELECTRONIC BRAKE SYSTEM, VEHICLE INCLUDING THE SAME, AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME
3y 9m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12687215
VIBRATION DAMPING DEVICE
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12687211
VIBRATION DAMPER
2y 10m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12679321
METHOD FOR DETERMINING WEAR VALUES ON AT LEAST A FIRST AND A SECOND VEHICLE BRAKE OF A MOTOR VEHICLE
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 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
66%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+6.1%)
2y 10m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 930 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