Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/426,819

DEVICE FOR COVERING PENETRATIONS AND VOIDS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 30, 2024
Examiner
FORD, GISELE D
Art Unit
3633
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
594 granted / 851 resolved
+17.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
897
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
42.1%
+2.1% vs TC avg
§102
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
§112
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 851 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 . 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, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greene, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0050619 in view of Havenor et al., U.S. Patent 12,000,521. Regarding claim 1, Greene discloses a protective device for a pipe comprising: providing a device (10) comprising: a mesh portion (12) having an upper edge portion (16), a lower edge portion (14), a right edge (edge comprising 28), and a left edge (edge distal from 28); an upper strap (28) coupled to a portion of the lower edge portion and further extends away from the right edge; wrapping the mesh portion around the pipe such that the lower edge of the mesh portion is in contact with the floor (24) and covering the floor penetration (see Fig. 4); and upon wrapping, fasten the upper strap to secure the device around the pipe (paragraph 21), but does not disclose a lower strap, fastening of the lower strap. Havenor teaches both an upper strap and a lower strap for securing a device to a conduit (see Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a lower strap similar to the upper strap for a simplified assembly/disassembly process, and since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St, Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Regarding claim 4, Greene discloses a protective device for a pipe, comprising: a mesh portion (12) having an upper edge portion (16), a lower edge portion (14), a right edge (edge comprising 28), and a left edge (edge distal to 28); an upper strap (28) coupled to a portion of the upper edge portion and further extends away from the right edge; but does not disclose a lower strap coupled to a portion of the lower edge portion and further extends away from the right edge. Havenor teaches both an upper strap and a lower strap for securing a device to a conduit (see Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a lower strap similar to the upper strap for a simplified assembly/disassembly process, and since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St, Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Claim(s) 2-3, 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greene, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0050619 in view of Havenor et al., U.S. Patent 12,000,521 and Ellis, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0150353. Regarding claims 2 and 5, the prior art as modified discloses a protective device for a pipe, but does not disclose wherein the device further comprises upper D rings and lower D rings, the upper D rings are for fastening the upper strap, and the lower D rings are for fastening the lower straps. Ellis teaches a covering device utilizing D-rings for fastening the device (paragraph 92). It would have been obvious to on e having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate D-rings at the upper and the lower straps as an effective securing means. Regarding claims 3 and 6, the prior art as modified discloses a protective device for a pipe but does not disclose wherein the device further comprises hook and loop fasteners for securing the free ends of the upper strap and the lower strap. Havenor teaches the use of hook and loop fasteners (152a, 152b) for securing straps of a device. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize hook and loops fasteners on the straps to further secure them to the device. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GISELE D FORD whose telephone number is (571)270-7326. The examiner can normally be reached M-T,Th-F 7:30am-4:30pm. 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, Brian Glessner can be reached at 571-272-6754. 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. GISELE D. FORD Examiner Art Unit 3633 /GISELE D FORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 30, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595381
METHOD FOR THE PRODUCTION OF STEEL COMPONENTS WITH FIRE RESISTANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582053
MODULAR RAISED GARDEN BED SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584312
Wall Element, Wall and Building as Well as Method for Construction
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577787
Decorative Panel, in Particular a Wall, Ceiling or Floor Panel, and a Covering Constructed by a Multitude of Such Panels
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577796
SINGLE-OPENING WALL CRACK INTELLIGENT GROUTING MACHINE AND CONSTRUCTION METHOD
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+13.4%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 851 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