Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/419,065

PUZZLE KITS

Non-Final OA §103§DP
Filed
Jan 22, 2024
Examiner
PETERS, BRIAN O
Art Unit
3711
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Kevin D Schlapik
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
447 granted / 617 resolved
+2.4% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
656
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
43.6%
+3.6% vs TC avg
§102
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
§112
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 617 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §DP
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 . DETAILED ACTION Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 1/22/2024 was/were considered by the examiner. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claim 28-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 11878255. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claim limitations of the application are found in the claims of the US patent. See the example claim below. US 11878255 18/419068 A puzzle kit comprising a first puzzle and a second puzzle, each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle comprising: a plurality of polyhedrons connected by hinges in a continuous loop, each polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons comprising: four faces and six edges; and wherein a first assembly of the first puzzle and the second puzzle forms a cube, wherein in the first assembly, the first puzzle wherein a second assembly of the first puzzle and the second puzzle forms a concave polyhedron, wherein the first puzzle and the second puzzle are not in congruent configurations in the second assembly, wherein a third assembly of the first puzzle and the second puzzle forms the concave polyhedron, wherein the first puzzle and the second puzzle are in congruent configurations in the third assembly, 28. (New) A puzzle kit comprising a first puzzle and a second puzzle, each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle comprising: a plurality of polyhedrons connected by hinges in a continuous loop, each polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons comprising: four faces and six edges; wherein a first assembly of the first puzzle and the second puzzle forms a cube, wherein in the first assembly, the first puzzle couples with the second puzzle and each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle are in congruent configurations, wherein a second assembly of the first puzzle and the second puzzle forms a concave polyhedron, wherein the first puzzle and the second puzzle are not in congruent configurations in the second assembly, wherein a third assembly of the first puzzle and the second puzzle forms the concave polyhedron, wherein the first puzzle and the second puzzle are in congruent configurations in the third assembly. The puzzle kit of claim 14, wherein the six edges of each polyhedron consist of a first edge having an edge length of two units, a second edge and a third edge having an edge length of the square root of three units (√(3) units), a fourth edge and a fifth edge having an edge length of the square root of two units (√(2) units), and a sixth edge having an edge length of one unit. 29. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 28, wherein the six edges of each polyhedron consist of a first edge having an edge length of two units, a second edge and a third edge having an edge length of the square root of three units (√(3) units), a fourth edge and a fifth edge having an edge length of the square root of two units (√(2) units), and a sixth edge having an edge length of one unit. The puzzle kit of claim 1, wherein each polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons has a tetrahedron shape. 30. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 28, wherein each polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons has a tetrahedron shape. The puzzle kit of claim 1, wherein each polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons is congruent with each other polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons. 31. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 28, wherein each polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons is congruent with each other polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons. The puzzle kit of claim 1, wherein the plurality of polyhedrons consist of twelve polyhedrons connected by the hinges in the continuous loop. 32. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 28, wherein the plurality of polyhedrons consist of twelve polyhedrons connected by the hinges in the continuous loop. The puzzle kit of claim 1, wherein the hinges comprise bridging strips, each bridging strip extending from one polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons to an adjacent polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons. 33. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 28, wherein the hinges comprise bridging strips, each bridging strip extending from one polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons to an adjacent polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons. The puzzle kit of claim 1, wherein for each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle, each of the hinges hingedly connects one of the six edges of one polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons to an identical edge of the six edges of another polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons. 34. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 28, wherein for each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle, each of the hinges hingedly connects one of the six edges of one polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons to an identical edge of the six edges of another polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons. The puzzle kit of claim 1, wherein for each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle, each of the hinges hingedly connects a first polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons to a second polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons such that a first face of the six faces of the first polyhedron is configured to reversibly abut a first face of the six faces of the second polyhedron, 35. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 14, wherein for each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle, each of the hinges hingedly connects a first polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons to a second polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons such that a first face of the six faces of the first polyhedron is configured to reversibly abut a first face of the six faces of the second polyhedron. The puzzle kit of claim 8, wherein for each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle, each of the hinges hingedly connects the first polyhedron to the second polyhedron such that a second face of the six faces of the first polyhedron is configured to toggle about the Note: “the hinges may comprise bridging strips” 36. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 35, wherein for each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle, each of the hinges hingedly connects the first polyhedron to the second polyhedron such that a second face of the six faces of the first polyhedron is configured to toggle about the hinge to abut a second face of the six faces of the second polyhedron. The puzzle kit of claim 9, wherein for each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle, the first polyhedron is connected to a third polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons such that a third face of the six faces of the first polyhedron is configured to abut a fourth face of the six faces of the third polyhedron, 37. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 36, wherein for each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle, the first polyhedron is connected to a third polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons such that a third face of the six faces of the first polyhedron is configured to abut a fourth face of the six faces of the third polyhedron. The puzzle kit of claim 9, wherein for each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle, the first face of the first polyhedron is congruent with the first face of the second polyhedron and wherein the second face of the first polyhedron is congruent with the second face of the second polyhedron. 39. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 36, wherein for each of the first puzzle and the second puzzle, the first face of the first polyhedron is congruent with the first face of the second polyhedron and wherein the second face of the first polyhedron is congruent with the second face of the second polyhedron. The puzzle kit of claim 1, wherein the concave polyhedron has a hexagonal profile with six peaks. 40. (New) The puzzle kit of claim 28, wherein the concave polyhedron has a hexagonal profile with six peaks. 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(s) 28, 30-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoenigschmid US 11697058 in view of Karagamii youtube.com/watch?v=Ps9aB8Xw9 e8. Regarding claim 28, Hoenigschmid discloses a puzzle kit comprising a a plurality of polyhedrons connected by hinges (312a-d) in a continuous loop (Fig. 6), each polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons comprising four faces and six edges (col. 6 ln. 33-34), wherein a first assembly of the is in congruent configurations (Fig. 1), wherein a second assembly of theis not in congruent configurations in the second assembly (Fig. 6A), wherein a third assembly of the is in congruent configurations in the third assembly (suggested by comparing Fig. 6A with Applicant’s Fig. 2). PNG media_image1.png 657 1432 media_image1.png Greyscale However, Hoenigschmid does not explicitly teach that there are a first and second puzzle the form the assemblies. Karagamii teaches a first and second puzzle to form the assemblies (0:37) in order to make additional combinations. PNG media_image2.png 856 1451 media_image2.png Greyscale Thus, 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 puzzle by utilizing a first and second puzzle as taught by Karagamii in order to make additional combinations. Regarding claim 30, Hoenigschmid further discloses that each polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons has a tetrahedron shape (Fig. 6A). Regarding claim 31, Hoenigschmid further discloses that each polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons is congruent with each other polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons (Fig. 6A). Regarding claim 32, Hoenigschmid further discloses that the plurality of polyhedrons consist of twelve polyhedrons connected by the hinges in the continuous loop (Fig. 6A). Regarding claim 33, Hoenigschmid further discloses that the hinges comprise bridging strips, each bridging strip extending from one polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons to an adjacent polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons (col. 8 ln. 29-55). Regarding claim 34, Hoenigschmid further discloses that each of the hinges hingedly connects one of the six edges of one polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons to an identical edge of the six edges of another polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons (Fig. 6A). Regarding claim 35, Hoenigschmid further discloses that each of the hinges hingedly connects a first polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons to a second polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons such that a first face of the six faces of the first polyhedron is configured to reversibly abut a first face of the six faces of the second polyhedron (Fig. 6A). Regarding claim 36, Hoenigschmid further discloses that each of the hinges hingedly connects the first polyhedron to the second polyhedron such that a second face of the six faces of the first polyhedron is configured to toggle about the hinge to abut a second face of the six faces of the second polyhedron (Fig. 6B. Regarding claim 37, Hoenigschmid further discloses that the first polyhedron is connected to a third polyhedron of the plurality of polyhedrons such that a third face of the six faces of the first polyhedron is configured to abut a fourth face of the six faces of the third polyhedron (Fig. 6E). Regarding claim 38, Hoenigschmid further discloses that the first polyhedron is connected to the third polyhedron such that a fourth face of the six faces of the first polyhedron is configured to abut a third face of the six faces of the third polyhedron (Fig. 6D). Regarding claim 39, Hoenigschmid further discloses that the first face of the first polyhedron is congruent with the first face of the second polyhedron and wherein the second face of the first polyhedron is congruent with the second face of the second polyhedron (Fig. E). Regarding claim 40, Hoenigschmid further discloses that the concave polyhedron has a hexagonal profile with six peaks (Fig. 6A). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN O PETERS whose telephone number is (571)272-2662. The examiner can normally be reached Tue-Sat, 12:00pm-10pm EST. 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, Eugene Kim can be reached at (571) 272-4463. 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. /BRIAN O PETERS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 22, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595806
EFFICIENT FAN ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595809
HEAT COLLECTING PUMP AND WASHING APPLIANCE HAVING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590589
RADIALLY COMPRESSIBLE AND EXPANDABLE ROTOR FOR A FLUID PUMP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584415
TURBINE ENGINE SEAL FOR TURBINE ENGINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12553412
HYDRAULIC SYSTEM FOR PITCH ANGLE ADJUSTMENT OF A ROTOR BLADE OF A WIND TURBINE AND WIND TURBINE WITH SUCH A HYDRAULIC SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
72%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+16.5%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 617 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