Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/398,266

Urinal Stand Device

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 28, 2023
Examiner
HAWK, NOAH CHANDLER
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
950 granted / 1545 resolved
+9.5% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
62 currently pending
Career history
1607
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
41.2%
+1.2% vs TC avg
§102
34.7%
-5.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1545 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains legal phraseology such as the term “comprises.” A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blechner in US Patent 4474202. Blechner teaches an urinal stand device that assists disabled men and boys in urinating while standing up, the urinal stand device comprising: a walker frame (18); a pair of handles (42/44); and lower stabilization rails (48/66); wherein the pair of handles are secured to the walker frame and allow a user to hold the handles for support; wherein the walker frame is configured in an open-front design (the walker is open between legs 14 and 16 at the front) that allows a user to get as close to the urinal or toilet (the walker can be placed about the appliance so that the appliance is all the way to the rear of the walker at bars 34 and 36), as needed; and further wherein the lower stabilization rails are secured to a bottom of the walker frame to provide support for the walker frame when in an upright position. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Roff in US Patent 11089923. Roff teaches, through the normal and customary use of the device, a method of assisting disabled users in utilizing a toilet or urinal, the method comprising the following steps: providing a urinal stand device comprising a walker frame (34) configured in a walker-like structure, with lower stabilization rails , a pair of handles (40), and a safety plate (24); walking with the urinal stand device to a toilet or urinal (see Column 5, lines 16-25); engaging the open front area of the walker frame with the urinal or toilet; stepping up onto the safety plate, as needed; and using the toilet or urinal to urinate while being stabilized by the urinal stand device. 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 2-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blechner as applied to Claim 1 above in view of Steele in US Patent 5983911. Regarding Claim 2, Blechner teaches that the walker frame comprises a pair of front vertical legs (14/16) and a pair of rear vertical legs (12/18). Blechner is silent on the use of longer rear legs. Steele teaches a walker frame with front (116) and rear (20) vertical legs, wherein the front vertical legs are positioned shorter than the rear vertical legs. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Blechner by using longer rear legs as taught by Steele in order to provide a more ergonomic position for the handles. Regarding Claim 3, Blechner, as modified, teaches that the front vertical legs are positioned closest to the toilet or urinal (when the appliance is in the position of the chair on which the user is seated) and the rear vertical legs are positioned closest to the user. Regarding Claim 4, Blechner, as modified, teaches (See Column 3, lines 9-11) that the length of the front and rear vertical legs can be adjusted using a telescoping feature. Regarding Claims 5 and 6, Blechner, as modified, teaches that a horizontal member connects the rear vertical legs at a middle position (36), and a top position (38) but is silent on a bottom most member. Steele teaches that a horizontal member (54) connects the rear vertical legs at a bottom position, and wherein the bottom horizontal member can be stepped on if needed, to prevent loss of balance while holding the pair of handles and urinating. Steele further teaches a safety plate (56) which can be added for further weight accommodation and stability. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Blechner, as modified, by adding a bottommost horizontal member as taught by Steele in order to provide more stability for the user. Regarding Claim 7, Blechner, as modified, teaches that horizontal members connect the front vertical legs to the rear vertical legs at a top (28/30) and a middle (70) position. Regarding Claim 8, Blechner, as modified, teaches that the front vertical legs are not connected together with a horizontal member, leaving the front vertical legs open and able to encompass the toilet or urinal (see Fig. 1). Regarding Claim 9, Blechner, as modified, teaches that the lower stabilization rails secure the front and rear vertical legs together, are wider in size and shape compared to the horizontal members, and are connected where the urinal stand device meets a ground surface to add stability (see Fig. 2). Regarding Claim 10, Blechner, as modified, teaches that the pair of handles extend out from the rear vertical legs (the handles are connected to and extend rearward of the rear legs). Regarding Claim 11, Blechner, as modified, teaches that the handles comprise a hand grip portion, but is silent on the details thereof. Steele teaches a handgrip portion (104) constructed of non-slip materials (such as a “bicycle grip”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handles of Blechner, as modified, by using a non-slip material as taught by Steele in order to provide a comfortable and usable grip for the user. Regarding Claim 12, Blechner, as modified, teaches (see Steele, element 56) that a bottom of the walker frame comprises a safety plate which can be added for further weight accommodation and stability. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blechner, as modified, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Killian in US Publication 2018/0104131. Blechner, as modified, is silent on the use of a urinal bottle. Killian teaches a walker including a urinal bottle (10) that can be hung from horizontal members (54), as needed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Blechner, as modified, by adding a urinal bottle as taught by Killian in order to allow the user to relieve himself on the go. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blechner in US Patent 4474202 in view of Steele in US Patent 5983911 and Killian in US Publication 2018/0104131. Blechner teaches an urinal stand device that assists disabled men and boys in urinating while standing up, the urinal stand device comprising: a walker frame (18) comprising a pair of front vertical legs (14/16) and a pair of rear vertical legs (12/18), a pair of handles (42/44) that extend out from the rear vertical legs; and lower stabilization rails (48/68) which secure the front and rear vertical legs together, are wider in size and shape compared to horizontal members, and are connected where the urinal stand device meets a ground surface to add stability; and wherein the pair of handles are secured to the walker frame and allow a user to hold the handles for support; wherein the front vertical legs are positioned closest to the toilet or urinal and the rear vertical legs are positioned closest to the user (when the appliance is in the position of the chair on which the user is seated); wherein length of the front and rear vertical legs can be adjusted using a telescoping feature (See Column 3, lines 9-11); wherein a horizontal member connects the rear vertical legs at a middle position (36), and a top position (38); wherein horizontal members connect the front vertical legs to the rear vertical legs at a top (28/30) and a middle (70) position; wherein the front vertical legs are not connected together with a horizontal member, leaving the front vertical legs open and able to encompass the toilet or urinal (see Fig. 1); wherein the walker frame is configured in an open-front design that allows a user to get as close to the urinal or toilet, (the walker is open between legs 14 and 16 at the front) that allows a user to get as close to the urinal or toilet (the walker can be placed about the appliance so that the appliance is all the way to the rear of the walker at bars 34 and 36) as needed; Blechner is silent on the use of longer rear legs. Steele teaches a walker frame with front (116) and rear (20) vertical legs, wherein the front vertical legs are positioned shorter than the rear vertical legs. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Blechner by using longer rear legs as taught by Steele in order to provide a more ergonomic position for the handles. Blechner is is silent on a bottom most horizontal member. Steele teaches that a horizontal member (54) connects the rear vertical legs at a bottom position, and wherein the bottom horizontal member can be stepped on if needed, to prevent loss of balance while holding the pair of handles and urinating. Steele further teaches a safety plate (56) which can be added for further weight accommodation and stability. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Blechner, as modified, by adding a bottommost horizontal member as taught by Steele in order to provide more stability for the user. Blechner, as modified, is silent on the use of a urinal bottle. Killian teaches a walker including a urinal bottle (10) that can be hung from horizontal members (54), as needed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Blechner, as modified, by adding a urinal bottle as taught by Killian in order to allow the user to relieve himself on the go. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blechner, as modified, as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Barnett, Jr. in US Publication 2011/0232665. Blechner, as modified is silent on the use of a folding frame. Barnett teaches a walker frame (100) which can be configured to fold about pivot points between an unfolded state (Fig. 1a) and a folded state (Fig, 1c). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Blechner, as modified, by using a folding walker frame as taught by Barnett in order to allow the user to more compactly store the device when not in use. Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blechner, as modified, as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Chanslor et al. in US Patent 4029311. Blechner, as modified, is silent on the use of wheels and brakes. Chanslor teaches a walker frame with vertical legs (12/14/16/18) comprising wheels (34/36/50/52) attached to a bottom surface of each vertical leg and handles (22) each handle includes a brake positioned (90) directly beneath for ease of use. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Blechner, as modified, by adding wheels and brakes as taught by Chanslor in order to allow the user to more easily move about and stop. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blechner, as modified, as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Roff in US Patent 11089923. Blechner, as modified, is silent on the use of a receptacle. Roff teaches a urinal stand device with a walker frame (36) wherein the walker frame comprises an optional receptacle (32) to house and protect a user's belongings. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Blechner, as modified, by adding a receptacle as taught by Roff in order to allow the user to more easily move their belongings when using the walker. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blechner, as modified, as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Opalka et al. in US Patent 6913279. Blechner is silent on the use of indicia. Opalka teaches a walker frame (50) comprising a plurality of indicia (81 and 76). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Blechner, as modified, by adding indicia as taught by Opalka in order to allow the user to decorate the device to their taste. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tingley, Landry et al., Good, Manning, Morris et al., England, Pearson, McGee, Lattig, and Love et al. teach walker frames for use with toilets or details of the walker frames. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH C. HAWK whose telephone number is (571)272-1480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5:30pm. 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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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. NOAH C. HAWK Primary Examiner Art Unit 3636 /Noah Chandler Hawk/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 28, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599206
Umbrella Pole Brace Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599207
A Sliding Seat Assembly for an Umbrella
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582571
MOBILITY SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575998
CRUTCH WITH A CONTOURED GRIP AND A FOREARM SUPPORT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575651
Umbrella
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
62%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+22.0%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1545 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