Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/439,808

RELEASEABLE SPRING-LOADED BUMPER ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Feb 13, 2024
Examiner
HUYNH, HAI H
Art Unit
3747
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Ford Global Technologies LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
93%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 93% — above average
93%
Career Allow Rate
1154 granted / 1236 resolved
+23.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
11 currently pending
Career history
1247
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.1%
-35.9% vs TC avg
§103
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§102
61.1%
+21.1% vs TC avg
§112
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1236 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Inventorship This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 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. Claims 1-18 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of copending Application No. 18/587,241 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they have the same scope. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. For claim 2 (see claim 2 of ‘241). For claim 3 (see claim 4 of ‘241). For claim 4-5, 7-8 (see claim 4-5 of ‘241). For claim 6 (see claim 7 of ‘241). For claim 9 (see claim 8 of ‘241). For claim 10 (see claim 9 of ‘241). For claim 11 (see claim 3 of ‘241). For claim 12 (see claim 10 of ‘241). For claim 13 (see claim 11 of ‘241). For claim 14 (see claim 12 of ‘241). For claim 15 (see claim 13 of ‘241). For claim 16 (see claim 17 of ‘241). For claim 17-18 (see claim 14-15 of ‘241). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAI H HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-4844. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM-4:00 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, Lindsay M Low can be reached at 571-272-1196. 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. /HAI H HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 13, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600294
TANKER TRUCK WITH REAR LIGHTING ASSEMBLY AND METHOD OF OPERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600346
BRAKE-TO-STEER LATERAL STABILITY MANAGEMENT BASED ON STABILITY INDICATOR CORRELATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600328
Trailer Vehicle Control System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589656
TRAILER BRAKE GAIN BASED ON REGENERATIVE BRAKE CAPACITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583398
Positioning Assist Device and Positioning Assist Method
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
93%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+6.8%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1236 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