Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/400,426

Blind rivet having embossed structure

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 29, 2023
Examiner
FOSTER, NICHOLAS L
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
553 granted / 739 resolved
+22.8% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
772
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
33.2%
-6.8% vs TC avg
§102
32.9%
-7.1% vs TC avg
§112
30.4%
-9.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 739 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the device being a blind rivet (claims 1-3) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Examiner notes that the illustrated device is not a blind rivet but instead appears to be a combination of a swage collar and pin/lockbolt. See the related 112(a) rejection below as overcoming such would obviate this objection. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1-3 fail to meet the written description requirement as though the original disclosure uses the term “blind rivet” the specification makes clear that the device is not a blind rivet and thus such was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Specifically the original specification and claims appear to disclose a headed pin/lockbolt with a swage collar attached thereto, and make clear that the mandrel/pin/lockbolt is not deformed at one end upon installation as would be required by the art accepted BRI ( to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing and in light of the specification) of the term rivet, and further is not a blind fastener as it clearly requires access to both sides of the element it is installed to as would be required for the art accepted BRI ( to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing and in light of the specification ) of this term. As the use of the terms in Applicant’s specification is not consistent to the BRI of one of ordinary skill in the art and as Applicant has not provided a specific different definition the claims are considered to contain subject matter that Applicants did not have possession of at the time of filing. Appropriate correction is required. Examiner recommends claiming one of “ a lockbolt with a swage collar”, “a pin with a swage collar”, “a fastening assembly”, etc. for the preamble, and replace the later terms of “rivet body” and “rivet head” with “swage collar” and “swage collar body” (respectively). The specification should also be amended in a similar manner (or at least to add that they are equivalent terms (e.g. rivet body = swage collar, blind rivet = lockbolt with swage collar, mandrel = lockbolt, etc.)). As it does not appear the claims themselves are indefinite they cannot be interpreted in a manner other than what is recited in the claims. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: There should be a colon at the end of line 2; “the shank diameter” in line 5 should read “a shank diameter”; The “wherein” at the end of line 5 should be removed and the comma before such should be a semicolon; “the end surface” in lines 6-7 should read “an end surface”; “that” in line 7 should be removed; “has” in line 7 should read “and has”; “the portion” in line 9 should read “a portion”; “ can be d-d/8 – d-d/16” in line 11 should read “ is d-d/8 to d-d/16” ; “an axial line-style slot structure separately” in lines 12-13 should read “ a separate axial line-style slot structure” ; “ can be d/ 4 8 – d/ 32 ” in line 1 4 should read “ is d/32 to d /48 ”; “a reverse tapered surface” in line 15 should read “the reverse tapered surface”; “a reverse tapered surface” in line s 1 6-17 should read “the reverse tapered surface”; “is” in line 17 should read “that is”; “3° – 8°” in line 17 should read “3° to 8°” ; “a reverse tapered surface” in line 1 9 should read “the reverse tapered surface”; “can increase the gripping force” in lines 19-20 should read “increases the gripping force”; “the pulling process” in line 20 should read “a pulling process”; “owing to such a design,” in line 20 should be removed; “the length of the pull section” in lines 20-21 should read “a length of the pull section”; “a reverse tapered surface” in line 21 should read “the reverse tapered surface”; “can be reduced” in line 21 should read “is reduced”; “a reverse tapered surface” in line 2 2 should read “the reverse tapered surface”; “the production cost” in lines 23-24 should read “a production cost”; “can match and be plugged” in line 25 should read “matched and is plugged”; “a circular arc angle” in line 27 should read “the circular arc angle”; “can match and fit ” in line 2 7-28 should read “ matches and fits ”; “a circular arc surface” in lines 28-29 should read “the circular arc surface”; “can engage and join” in line 29 should read “engages and joins”; “a radius of R” in line 30 should read “the radius R”; “the deviation” in lines 30-31 should read “a deviation”; and “the eccentric force” in line 31 should read “an eccentric force”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a circular arc angle” should read “the circular arc angle”. Appropriate correction is required. Allowable Subject Matter Though no claims are currently in condition for allowance, upon correction of the above claim objections and 112(a) rejections, it would appear that the claims would be in condition for allowance as the prior art of record, while disclosing similar pin/swage collar fastening elements fails to disclose the specific claimed diameters, tapered portions, angles, and specific functions recited in the present claim 1. Any final determination on patentability would be dependent on the specific wording of any amendment filed and would likely require at least additional consideration (and possibly further searching). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and provides examples of similar fastening arrangements including a grooved pin type member with a deformable swage collar thereon. Specifically see King, Jr. (US 3,317,572) (though many other of the cited references are substantially similar) disclosing a grooved pin/lockbolt (10,10a,10b,16) with a grip section (i.e. the part the teeth of 38 grip as seen in Figs. 16, etc.) with a deformable swage collar (34, etc.) and such configured for a similar use as is disclosed in the instant specification (i.e. a pulling process). Other cited references disclose magnetic washers and washers used with such pin/lockbolt and swage collar fasteners. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT NICHOLAS L FOSTER whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-5354 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 9am-5pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Kristina Fulton can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-7376 . 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 L FOSTER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 29, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601309
HERMETICALLY SEALED CASE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595850
SEAL MEMBER FOR ROLLING BEARING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590655
INTERLOCKING SECTIONAL TUBING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589474
SEAL INSERTION TOOL FOR A FLUID DELIVERY MODULE AND METHOD OF INSTALLING A SEAL INTO A FLUID DELIVERY MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590635
METAL END CAP SEAL
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
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.5%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 739 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