Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/434,969

LOCKING MECHANISM FOR A FASTENER RECEPTACLE ASSEMBLY

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Feb 07, 2024
Examiner
HOROWITZ, NOAH NMN
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
124 granted / 171 resolved
+20.5% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
202
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
49.4%
+9.4% vs TC avg
§102
35.6%
-4.4% vs TC avg
§112
14.2%
-25.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 171 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 Applicant’s arguments, filed 19 November 2025, with respect to the objections to claims 2, 7 and 9 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections of 19 August 2025 has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejection of 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. Claim Objections Claim(s) 5 objected to because of the following informalities: claim(s) should be amended to recite “wherein [[the]] a fastener-receiving portion has a longitudinal axis extending parallel to a rotational axis”. Appropriate correction or clarification is required. Claim(s) 6 objected to because of the following informalities: claim(s) should be amended to recite “wherein [[the]] a fastener-receiving portion includes a shank-receiving portion and a head-receiving portion”. Appropriate correction or clarification is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 3-6 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lanius (US-5149152-A). With regards to claim 1, Lanius discloses a locking mechanism (24 Figure 1) comprising: a rotatable actuator (82 Figure 6); a lid lock (112 Figure 6) operably connected to the actuator so that the lid lock moves to a locking position responsive to rotation of the actuator to a first angular orientation (Figure 4), and so that the lid lock moves to an unlocking position responsive to rotation of the actuator to a second angular orientation (Figure 3); and a lid latch (74 Figure 6) structured to be engageable with the lid lock when the lid lock is in the locking position (Figure 4), and structured to be disengaged from the lid lock when the lid lock is in the unlocking position (Figure 3), wherein the rotatable actuator has an elliptical actuation surface (88 Figure 6) structured to contact the lid lock to push the lid lock from the unlocking position into the locking position (Col. 6 Lines 4-32). With regards to claim 3, Lanius discloses the locking mechanism of claim 1, further comprising: a hub portion (96 Figure 6) rotationally coupled to the actuator (82 Figure 6); and a fastener-receiving portion (98 Figure 2) rotationally coupled to the hub portion. With regards to claim 4, Lanius discloses the locking mechanism of claim 3, wherein the fastener-receiving portion (98 Figure 2) comprises an insert (104 Figure 6) detachably mounted on the hub portion (96 Figure 6) so as to be removable from the hub portion (Col. 5 Lines 58-65). With regards to claim 5, Lanius discloses the locking mechanism of claim 3, wherein the fastener-receiving cavity (108 Figure 2) has a longitudinal axis (central axis of 108, Figure 2) extending parallel to a rotational axis (rotational axis of 98, Figure 2) of the fastener-receiving portion (98 Figure 2). With regards to claim 6, Lanius discloses the locking mechanism of claim 3, wherein the fastener-receiving cavity (108 Figure 2) includes a shank-receiving (interpreted as a statement of intended use) portion (108-upper, Figure 2) and a head-receiving (interpreted as a statement of intended use) portion (108-lower, Figure 2). With regards to claim 9, Lanius discloses a receptacle assembly (10 Figure 1) including the locking mechanism (24 Figure 1) in accordance with claim 1. With regards to claim 10, Lanius discloses the receptacle assembly of claim 9, further comprising a receptacle (12 Figure 1) and a lid (14 Figure 1) operably connected to the receptacle and to the lid latch (24 Figure 1), the lid being structured to cover (as shown Figure 1) an opening of the receptacle (as shown Figures 8-9). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7 and 11-13 allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Although the references of record show some features similar to those of applicant's device, the prior art fails to teach or make obvious the claimed invention. With regards to claim 11, the prior art fails to teach a fastener-receiving portion rotationally coupled to the hub portion and including a head- receiving portion and a shank-receiving portion; and a key rotatably secured to the base portion, the key including a hub rotation prevention portion structured to contact a surface of the base portion when the key rotates responsive to insertion of a shank of an over-length fastener into the shank-receiving portion. With regards to claim 13, the prior art fails to teach a fastener-receiving portion rotationally coupled to the hub portion and including head- receiving portion and a shank-receiving portion structured SO that rotation of the hub portion with respect to the base portion is enabled when: a) a fastener with a head having a thickness equal to or less than a predetermined thickness is received in the head-receiving portion; and b) an overall length of the fastener equal to a combination of the head thickness and a length of a shank of the fastener received in the shank-receiving portion lies within a predetermined range. Therefore, such an arrangement is not taught by the prior art, nor can the Examiner can find teaching or motivation to suggest such a modification to one of ordinary skill in the art without fundamentally altering the principles of operation of the device or otherwise relying upon the benefit of impermissible hindsight reasoning. 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 Noah Horowitz, whose telephone number is (571)272-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11:00AM - 7:00 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, Kristina Fulton, can be reached at (571) 272-7376. 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. /NOAH HOROWITZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3675 /KRISTINA R FULTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 07, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Oct 16, 2025
Interview Requested
Nov 06, 2025
Interview Requested
Nov 13, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 13, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 19, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 05, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601207
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SWITCH CONTROL OF MOTOR VEHICLE LATCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12577817
VEHICLE INSIDE DOOR LEVER ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12559992
MODULE MOUNTING SYSTEM ELEMENT FOR MOUNTING ON A MOTOR VEHICLE DOOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12560021
VAULT LOCK SYSTEM AND VAULT OR SAFE EQUIPPED WITH THE VAULT LOCK SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12553264
VEHICLE DOOR LOCK DEVICE
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+28.9%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 171 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