Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/417,058

Barrier Gate Optimized for Compact Transport and Simplified Onsite Assembly

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 19, 2024
Examiner
PONCIANO, PATRICK BERNAS
Art Unit
3634
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Origin Point Brands LLC
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
50 granted / 87 resolved
+5.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
132
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
39.9%
-0.1% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
32.4%
-7.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 87 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office Action is in response to the claims filed on 12/19/2025. Claims 1, 5, 15, 19, 21-36 are currently pending and have been examined below. Claims 2-4, 6-14, 16-18, and 20 are cancelled. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/19/2025 has been entered. Claim Objections Claims 1 and 5 are objected to because of the following informalities: In lines 2-3 of claim 1, “the longest dimension of the stanchion” should read --a longest dimension of the stanchion--. In lines 8-9 of claim 1, “the longest dimension of the brace” should read --a longest dimension of the brace--. Note that these issues are also present in the independent claim 5. In lines 13-15 of claim 1, “the brace may be received within the stanchion by inserting the brace through the open end only when the brace is not attached to the stanchion” is objected. The objection is set forth because the limitation “only when the brace is not attached” is extremely broad (see definition of ‘attached’ and ‘join’ below) and the claim requires the brace to be received within the stanchion only when the brace is not attached to the stanchion. However per the definitions below, figure 1 shows the brace within the stanchion while it is attached to the stanchion. Note that no 112(b) issues set forth as the scope of the claim is clear in light of the specification. Perhaps applicant meant --the brace may be received within the stanchion by inserting the brace through the open end only when the brace is not fixedly attached to the stanchion and to the arm--? PNG media_image1.png 141 464 media_image1.png Greyscale Source: American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved. PNG media_image2.png 137 474 media_image2.png Greyscale Source: American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved. Above provides non-limiting examples, the applicant(s) must find and correct all issues similar to those discussed above. 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. Claims (1, 21, and 23-26); (5, 27, and 29-32); and (15, 19, 22, and 33-36) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mulgrew (US 20080179581). Note that the dependent claims were written with respect to their dependency. Claim 1 (Mulgrew discloses) A barrier gate (120; figures 37-46), comprising: a hollow stanchion (111) defining a first length (vertical length of 111) along the longest dimension of the stanchion, one end of the stanchion at an end of the first length being open (figure 38 showing open end of 111); an arm (115) rotatably connected to the stanchion (via hinges 141 and 142); a brace (126), the brace defining a second length (length of 126 in figure 38) along the longest dimension of the brace and defining a brace profile perpendicular to the second length (profile of 126 in figure 38); the brace attachable to the stanchion and to the arm (figure 37; 126 attachable to 111 by way of other elements in between) to fix rotation of the stanchion relative to the arm (intended use; ‘fix’ was interpreted as --make stable or firm--); and the open end configured such that the brace may be received within the stanchion by inserting the brace through the open end only when the brace is not attached to the stanchion (figures 38 and 41 showing the brace received within the stanchion when the brace is not attached to the stanchion in the assembled configuration in figure 37). Claim 21 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 1, in which the brace is attachable to the arm without a threaded fastener (figure 37). Claim 23 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 1, in which the stanchion, the arm, and the brace are rectilinear (figure 37). Claim 24 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 1, further including a wedge plate (134) attached to the arm, and the brace connects to the arm at the wedge plate (figure 37). Claim 25 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 1, in which the stanchion carries a hinge plate (135) that is located outboard of the stanchion and opposite the arm (figure 37). Claim 26 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 1, in which the brace carries a connection plate (one of the plate faces of 126 in the perspective view in figure 38) and the brace profile includes the connection plate (figure 38). Claim 5 (Mulgrew discloses) A barrier gate (120; figures 37-46), comprising: a hollow stanchion (111) defining a length (vertical length of 111) along the longest dimension of the stanchion, the length having a first end (top end) and an opposing second end (bottom end), the second end being open (figure 38); an arm (115) rotatably connected to the stanchion (via hinges 141 and 142); a brace (126), the brace having opposed third and fourth ends (respective oblique ends of 126) and defining a brace profile (profile of 126 in figure 38) predetermined to be receivable within the hollow stanchion through the second end (figure 41), such that the brace may be removably positioned within the stanchion only by passing the third end through the second end and moving the third end along the length to proximate the first end (figure 41 showing the brace removably positioned within the stanchion); the brace attachable to the stanchion at an angle to the stanchion (figure 37); and the brace is attachable to the arm without the use of a threaded fastener (figures 37-38 showing 126 touching 115 without any fastener), to fix rotation of the arm relative to the stanchion (intended use; ‘fix’ was interpreted as --make stable or firm--). Claim 27 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 5, in which attaching the brace to the stanchion and to the arm fixes the rotation of the stanchion perpendicular to the arm (attachment of the brace to both the arm and stanchion provides structure to stabilize a downward rotation the arm towards the stanchion). Claim 29 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 5, in which the brace includes a connection plate (131), the connection plate is sized to removably reside within the stanchion (figure 37), and the connection plate being configured to be attached to the stanchion (figure 37). Claim 30 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 5, in which the arm carries an extension (125) that telescopically slides relative to the arm (figure 41). Claim 31 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 5, in which the barrier gate further includes an extension (125) residing within the arm that telescopically extends relative to the arm (figure 41). Claim 32 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 5, in which the brace includes a wedge plate (Annotated figure 38 below) at one end and the arm carries a brace bracket (Annotated figure 38 below), the wedge plate being configured to interfit with the brace bracket (intended use; the wedge plate can be configured to interfit with the brace bracket similar to the interfit connection of 121-125 to 115). Claim 15 (Mulgrew discloses) A barrier gate (120; figures 37-46), comprising: a stanchion (111), the stanchion having a first end and a second end (both shown in Annotated figure 37 below) and defining an interior hollow (figures 38 and 41), the first end being open (figure 38); an arm (115) with third and fourth ends, the third end attached to the stanchion (Annotated figure 37 below); a beam (125; figure 41) that extends telescopically from the arm; a brace (126), the brace having a fifth end and a sixth end and defining a brace profile that is smaller than the interior hollow (Annotated figure 37 below; figure 41); wherein the barrier gate defines two states: a compact transport state (state in figure 41) in which the first and second ends of the stanchion reside proximate to the arm, and the brace resides within the interior hollow of the stanchion through the first end and unattached to the arm and the stanchion (figure 41 showing the brace resides within the interior hollow and unattached to the arm and the stanchion); and a deployed state (state in figure 37) in which one of the first end and second end is disposed distal to the arm, the fifth end is attached to the stanchion, and the sixth end is attached to the arm (the brace attached to the stanchion by way of other elements in between). PNG media_image3.png 590 574 media_image3.png Greyscale Annotated figure 37 Claim 19 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 15, in which the beam extends telescopically from within the arm (figure 41). Claim 22 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 15, in which the second end is rotatably connected to the third end (via 141 and 142). Claim 33 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 15, in which the attachment of the sixth end to the arm in the deployed state is devoid of a threaded fastener (figure 37). Claim 34 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 15, in which the third end is hingeably attached to the stanchion (figure 37). Claim 35 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 15, in which the stanchion, the arm, and the brace are rectilinear (figure 37). Claim 36 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 15, in which the stanchion defines a constant first cross-section along a length of the stanchion (cross-section of 111 shown in figure 41) and the arm defines a constant second cross-section along a length of the arm (cross-section of 115 shown in figure 41), the first and second cross-sections being identical (identical in the number of sides; figure 41). 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. Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mulgrew as applied to claims 5, 27, and 29-32 above. Claim 28 (Mulgrew discloses) The barrier gate of Claim 5, further including a brace bracket (Annotated figure 38 below). Mulgrew fails to disclose in which the brace bracket is attached to the arm and the brace connects to the arm by interfitting with the brace bracket. (However, Mulgrew teaches) connecting braces (121-125) to an arm (115) by interfitting with a brace bracket (Annotated figure 38 below). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to connect the brace (126) of Mulgrew to the arm as taught by Mulgrew, with a reasonable expectation of success, for providing a more secured and stable installation between the brace and the arm. PNG media_image4.png 502 607 media_image4.png Greyscale Annotated figure 38 Response to Arguments Applicant’s amendments directed to the drawing and specification objections were considered and the previous objections were withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments directed to the claim objections and 112 rejections were considered by the examiner. The previous objections and rejections were withdrawn. Applicant's arguments filed on 12/19/2025 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK B PONCIANO whose telephone number is (571)272-9910. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-4:00. 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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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. /PATRICK B. PONCIANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3634 /DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 19, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 31, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Feb 04, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 30, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 19, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600213
QUICKLY ASSEMBLED AND DISASSEMBLED WINDOW FRAME STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12584346
DEPLOYABLE DOORWAY BUMPER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584338
STACKING SCREEN DOOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576698
VEHICLE DOOR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577823
MULTI-PANEL DOOR SYSTEM, AND DUAL-SYNCHRONIZATION DRIVE ASSEMBLY FOR A MULTI-PANEL DOOR SYSTEM
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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+14.5%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 87 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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