Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/445,452

Accessory mount for a electric drill

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Aug 22, 2023
Examiner
MARSH, STEVEN M
Art Unit
3632
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
1238 granted / 1560 resolved
+27.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1595
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§102
36.0%
-4.0% vs TC avg
§112
27.5%
-12.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1560 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION This is the second office action or US Application 18/445,452 for an Accessory Mount for a Electric Drill. 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 § 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. Claim 2 is 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. The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice, and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. Claim 2 recites the limitation "the accessory" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 2 recites the limitation "the drill motor" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 2 recites the limitation "the accessory mount" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 2 recites the limitation “the other side of the mount” in the 2nd to last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For reasons noted above, the claims are unclear, but will be examined to the best extent possible. 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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023,0117562 to Nooner et al. Regarding claim 2, Nooner et al. discloses a universal attachment point on a handheld electric drill to accept and add accessories to a drill (see figures 1A and 1B, and see paragraph 0033). Nooner et al. discloses an apparatus (100) shaped in a way that allows different accessories to slide and lock into place making the accessory part of the drill (accessories can slide into clip 110, which then locks them into place). The apparatus is securely mounted to a drill motor (via drill 10) and sticks out the top of the drill (10… see Figure 1B). The location of the mount is on the back of the drill facing the top and the accessory mount has cuts and grooves (153b, 154b) that allow another piece to slide and lock together to fasten accessories securely. The mount is attached to the drill and fixed to a strong point to withstand forces an accessory can produce. Nooner et al. does not disclose the apparatus as made of metal. However, the specific material used is a design preference that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the present invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would know that a known material, such as metal, can be utilized as the material based on strength and cost considerations. 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 STEVEN M MARSH whose telephone number is (571)272-6819. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9 am-7:30 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached on 571-272-4797. 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. STEVEN M. MARSH Primary Examiner Art Unit 3632 /STEVEN M MARSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 22, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 29, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 01, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 01, 2024
Response Filed
Mar 24, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601425
DEVICE FOR ATTACHING AN ELEMENT TO A PART OF A MOTOR VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598957
SUBSTRATE TRANSFER APPARATUS AND SUBSTRATE TRANSFER METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590602
TRIM ATTACHMENT ASSEMBLY FOR MOUNTING SOLAR PANEL EQUIPMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588789
System, Apparatus and Method for Toiletry Convenience
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582253
Self-Righting Hydration Cup Holder
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+7.4%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1560 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