Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/401,828

WOODEN LONG PRODUCT SORTING DEVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 02, 2024
Examiner
SINGH, KAVEL
Art Unit
3651
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Hans Hundegger Beteiligungs GMBH & CO. Kg
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
1086 granted / 1298 resolved
+31.7% vs TC avg
Minimal +5% lift
Without
With
+4.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1327
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.0%
+5.0% vs TC avg
§102
40.1%
+0.1% vs TC avg
§112
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1298 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Response to Arguments The rejection under 112, second paragraph to claim 3 has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant argues on page 9 of the arguments submitted on 8/29/2025 that Dorfman does not teach “the wooden long products moved from one component support device to another component support device”. That language is not in the claim language of claim 1 is currently presented. Therefore, the argument is moot. For the foregoing reasons, the claims stand rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claim(s) 1-2, 4-8, 10-11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dorfman SU Patent No 1744012-A1 in view of Moore U.S. Patent No. 3,768,669. Claim 1, Dorfman teaches a wooden long product sorting device Fig. 1 for automated distribution and transfer of a longer wooden components processed in a woodworking plant, to different trays or receptacles 15 Abstract, the wooden long product sorting device comprising two or more receiving and transfer devices 13,14 arranged side by side and parallel to each other, wherein each of the two or more receiving and transfer devices 13,14 include a component support 3 pivotable between a horizontal receiving position and a folded-up transfer position C4 L35-56 wherein, when in the folded-up transfer position 12,14, the component support 3 is configured both for sorting wooden components, but does not teach as Moore teaches by releasing a tray or a receptacle 84 located below and for sorting wooden components 42 into further trays or receptacles 84 by passing a wooden component 42 lying thereon to a pick-up and transfer device 16 arranged next to the component support 10 Fig. 2 C2 L40-67. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Dorfman with the transport configuration taught in Moore with a reasonable expectation of success because Claim 2, Dorfman teaches the two or more receiving and transfer devices 13,14 are arranged on one or both longitudinal sides of a transportation device 4 configured for transferring a wooden component to a first receiving and transfer device 13,14 C4 L57-58; C5 L1-5. Claim 4, Dorfman teaches the component supports 3 are configured as continuous bearing plate having a rectangular upper bearing surfaces Fig. 1. Claim 5, Dorfman teaches the component supports 3 are each arranged on a horizontal longitudinal beam 2 and pivotable about a horizontal axis of rotation Fig. 1. Claim 6, Dorfman teaches the horizontal longitudinal beam 2 is supported on vertical supports 1 spaced from each other Fig. 1. Claim 7, Dorfman teaches each of the component supports 3 has an upwardly curved rounding on a freely projecting first longitudinal side of 3 Fig. 1. Claim 8, Dorfman teaches each of the component supports 3 includes an upwardly curved ramp 20 on a second longitudinal side opposite the freely projecting first longitudinal side Fig. 2. Claim 10, Dorfman does not teach as Moore teaches the trays or receptacles 15 are arranged on right and left longitudinal sides of the horizontal longitudinal beams 7 Fig. 2. Claim 11, Dorfman teaches each of the receptacles 15 is configured as a stake car having a transport carriage configured as a flat carriage having retaining posts or stakes inserted on sides of the transport carriage pointing upwards Fig. 1. Claim 13, Dorfman teaches the longer wooden component are at least one of boards, beams, and bars Abstract. Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dorfman SU Patent No 1744012-A1 in view of Moore U.S. Patent No. 3,768,669 in view of Divoux FR Patent No. 2481959-A1. Claim 3, Dorfman teaches the transportation device 4 is designed as a transportation belt with a conveyor belt that can be driven in the longitudinal direction, but does not teach as Divoux teaches tilted to the side Fig. 5. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Dorfman with the tiltable conveyor taught in Divoux with a reasonable expectation of success because Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dorfman SU Patent No 1744012-A1 in view of Moore U.S. Patent No. 3,768,669 in view of Wahls U.S. Patent No. 8,287,225. Claim 12, Dorfman does not teach as Wahls teaches ropes or tarpaulins Fig. 5 are arranged between the retaining posts or stakes of 10 C6 L44-52. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the transport disclosed in Dorfman with the bin configuration taught in Dahls with a reasonable expectation of success because Allowable Subject Matter Claim 9 is 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. Claims 14-20 are allowed. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAVEL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-2362. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8am-6pm. 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, Gene Crawford can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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. /KAVEL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651 KS
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 02, 2024
Application Filed
May 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 29, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589944
TRAY FOR PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION SORTER AND ARTICLE SORTING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583683
Method of Making Positive Drive Conveyor Belt
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583686
ROLLER-AND-RAIL CARGO HANDLING SYSTEM WITH PALLET-MOVING TROLLEY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577057
VERTICALLY ADJUSTABLE SORTATION DEVICES AND SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577052
CERAMIC ABLATION-RESISTANT CONVEYOR BELT AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+4.6%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1298 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