Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/418,959

DRAWER PULL-OUT GUIDE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 22, 2024
Examiner
DAVIS, CASSANDRA HOPE
Art Unit
3631
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Julius Blum GmbH
OA Round
2 (Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allow Rate
789 granted / 1328 resolved
+7.4% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
1371
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§102
30.5%
-9.5% vs TC avg
§112
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1328 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 were received on 11/12/2025. These drawings are approved. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-5, 7-26 are 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. Regarding claim 1, line 27, it is unclear if the “profile” and the flat metal sheet” are the same as the profile and flat metal sheet recited in line 16. Regarding claim 1, line 30, it is unclear if the “profile”, the “flat metal sheet” and the “longitudinal edges” are the same as the profile and flat metal sheet recited in line 16 and 17. Regarding claim 1, line 36, it is unclear if the “profile”, the “flat metal sheet” and the “longitudinal edges” are the same as the profile and flat metal sheet recited in line 16 and 17. Regarding claim 1, line 27, it is unclear if the “at least two embossings” is the same as the embossing recited in line 30. Regarding claim 15, the phrase “the inner area of the at least one of the carcass rail and the drawer rail” and “the other area of the at least one of the carcass rail and the drawer rail” lack antecedent basis. Regarding claim 16, it is unclear if the phrases “the lateral surface” and “a lateral surface adjoining this lateral surface” is the same as the “at least two lateral outer surfaces” recited in claim 1. Regarding claim 26, the phrase “the at least one embossing” lacks antecedent basis. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-5 and 7-26 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5 and 7-26 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 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 CASSANDRA DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6642. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM-4:30 PM. 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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 571-272-8227. 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. /CASSANDRA DAVIS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 22, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Nov 12, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602343
MATERIAL DISPLAY SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593932
FRAMED IMAGE RETENTION DEVICE AND METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582248
FLORAL FRAMES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12542078
DEVICE FOR A UTILITY VEHICLE STRUCTURE, AND UTILITY VEHICLE STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTED WITH THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12522156
DEPLOYABLE FRONT LICENSE PLATE BRACKET
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 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
59%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+25.5%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1328 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