Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/385,040

MEDICAL SUPPORT AND SECURING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Oct 30, 2023
Examiner
WILSON, LEE D
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
1458 granted / 1824 resolved
+9.9% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1858
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
§102
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§112
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1824 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claim 9 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. The following claims are vague, indefinite, awkwardly, confusingly worded and/or lacking proper antecedent basis: “a first planar surface” in claim 9. The limitation has been previously mentioned. 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. Claim(s) 1-4 and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Rosing 8316777. Rosing discloses the claimed invention as recited in the claims as shown below: A support securing device Fig.1 for securing items wherein said device is arcuately shaped 1000 . PNG media_image1.png 734 722 media_image1.png Greyscale The support securing device of claim 1 wherein said device includes a first planar surface 31 formed by the device's periphery and a second planar surface 2000 recessed 50 within said first planar surface. PNG media_image1.png 734 722 media_image1.png Greyscale The support securing device of claim 2 wherein said device is arcuately shaped and includes a first planar surface formed by the device's periphery and a second planar surface recessed 50 within said first planar surface. PNG media_image1.png 734 722 media_image1.png Greyscale 4. The support securing device of claim 3 wherein said second planar surface includes a passage 33 for a locking member 63 to hold items within said recess, said locking member comprises a locking end and a working end. 8. A support securing device wherein said device includes a first planar surface 31 formed by the device's periphery and a second planar surface recessed 50 within said first planar surface. 9. The support securing device of claim 8 wherein said device includes a first planar surface formed Fig.1 by the device's periphery and a second planar surface forming a recess 50 within said first planar surface. 10. The support securing device of claim 9 wherein said second planar surface includes a passage 33 for a locking member 63 and the member device to hold items within said recess. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 14-20 are allowed. Claims 5-7 and 11-13 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. The 892 form discloses the prior art being made of record. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEE D WILSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4499. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6;30-4;30. 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, BRIAN KELLER can be reached at 571-272-8548. 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. LEE D. WILSON Examiner Art Unit 3723 Ldw /LEE D WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 January 29, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 30, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599789
RESCUE ACCESS WEDGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595849
SEAL RING INSTALLATION MODULE AND SEAL RING INSTALLATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589976
LIFTING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583068
Clamping Arrangement
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12564923
MOUNTING TOOL FOR POSITIONING A SHAFT SEALING RING ON A SHAFT AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING A SHAFT SEAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
80%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+18.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1824 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