Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/468,572

FOLDING TRAILER

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Sep 15, 2023
Examiner
GURARI, EREZ
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
729 granted / 932 resolved
+26.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
948
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
46.1%
+6.1% vs TC avg
§102
35.4%
-4.6% vs TC avg
§112
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 932 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “two sleeves that intersect each other,” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Specifically, it is not clear what is meant by "there are two sleeves that intersect each other" and this feature is not properly depicted in the drawings. For purposes herein, the examiner reads the claim without the limitation, 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (2004/0400120) in view of Yang (US 9,073,564). In re claim 1, Sun discloses a standing rod assembly (11) comprising a first fixed vertical pipe, a second fixed vertical pipe, a third fixed vertical pipe and a fourth fixed vertical pipe (4 vertical pipes at the corners as seen in fig. 1), the vertical rod assembly (12) also comprises a top angle fixing member which is respectively fixed on the top of four vertical pipes (fig. 1) and a linkage sliding sleeve (14) which is gliding connected with four vertical rods respectively; A left and right folding assembly (3) is arranged between the said second and fourth fixed vertical pipes and between the first and third fixed vertical pipes (fig. 1), the first and second fixed vertical pipes and the third and fourth fixed vertical pipes are provided with front and back folding components (clear from fig. 1, par. 16) ; The left and right folding assembly (3) comprises a first side cross tube (31) and a sixth side cross tube (fig. 2 – cross tube which mirrors the first side cross tube and extending down from the opposite vertical rod) rotationally matched with the top angle fixing member (12), respectively, the left-right folding assembly (3) also comprises a second cross tube (32) and a fifth cross tube (fig. 2 – cross tube which mirrors the second side cross tube and extending up from the opposite vertical rod) rotationally matched with the linkage sliding sleeve (fig. 2), respectively, the left-right folding assembly (3) also comprises a third cross tube (33) and a fourth cross tube (fig. 2 – cross tube which mirrors the third side cross tube from the opposite side) rotationally matched with a first cross tube and a sixth cross tube (fig. 2), respectively; The front and rear folding assemblies include a first cross elbow and a first cross straight pipe, which are rotationally matched with the top angle fixing member, respectively, the front and rear folding assembly also comprises a second cross bend pipe and a second cross straight pipe rotationally matched with the linkage sliding sleeve, respectively (fig. 2). Sun differs in that it does not teach the claimed handle assembly. Attention, however, is directed to Yang which teaches a handle assembly arranged between the first fixed vertical pipe and the second fixed vertical pipe (clear from figs. 3-4), the handle assembly includes a sleeve at bottoms of the first and second fixed vertical pipes (sleeves at vertical pipes to which rods 30 connect, see fig. 1), respectively; there are two sleeves that intersect each other (see 112 reject above), a fixed rod sleeve that is rotationally matched with the two sleeves is arranged at a cross center of the two sleeves (clear from figs. 1, 3 and 4 – sleeve which holds handle device 16), and a third telescopic cylinder (16) is fixed at a center of the fixed rod sleeve, the third telescopic cylinder is provided with a second telescopic cylinder on top of which a first telescopic cylinder is fitted, a handle is fixed on a top of the first telescopic cylinder (clear from figs. 1-3). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Sun with the handle of Yang to ensure it properly collapses when the wagon is folded. The examiner notes that the disclosed handle assembly is a common design in the wagon arts for exactly that reason. See also, for example, Luo (US 2024/0425111), Jin (US 9,056,621), Sun (US 11,932,298), and Yang (US 9,738,298). In re claim 2, Sun teaches the first side crossing tube is connected with the second side crossing tube, the fourth side crossing tube (34) and the sixth side crossing tube (36) respectively by a rotating shaft, the second crossing tube (32) and the third crossing tube (33) are connected by a rotating shaft, and the third crossing tube (33) and the sixth crossing tube (36) are connected by a rotating shaft, the fourth cross tube (34) and the fifth cross tube (35) are connected by a rotating shaft, and the fifth cross tube (35) and the sixth cross tube (36) are connected by a rotating shaft (clear from fig. 2). In re claim 3, Sun teaches the first cross bend and the second Cross Bend are connected by a rotating shaft, the first cross straight pipe and the second cross straight pipe are connected by a rotating shaft, and the first cross straight pipe and the first cross straight pipe are connected by a rotating shaft, the second cross elbow and the second cross straight pipe are connected by a rotating shaft (clear from fig. 2 and the fact that all the parts fold). In re claim 4, Sun teaches the rod assembly (2) also comprises a bottom angle fixing member (13) which is respectively fixed at the bottom of four vertical pipes, the bottom of the rod assembly (2) is provided with a bottom support assembly (4) , the bottom supporting assembly 4) comprises a first bottom connecting pipe, a second bottom connecting pipe, a third bottom connecting pipe and a fourth bottom connecting pipe in an X-shape respectively and rotationally matched with the four bottom corner fixing pieces (par. 29), the cross center of the first bottom connecting pipe, the second bottom connecting pipe, the third bottom connecting pipe and the fourth bottom connecting pipe is also provided with a bottom connecting piece (41) which is rotationally matched with the four bottom connecting pipes respectively (par. 29). In re claim 6, Sun teaches a wheel assembly is arranged at the bottom of the rod assembly, the wheel assembly comprises a wheel at the bottom of the first fixed riser, the second fixed riser, the third fixed riser and the fourth fixed riser, respectively, the wheels at the bottom of the first and second fixed vertical pipes and the joint of the two vertical pipes are respectively provided with a universal wheel fork, the wheels at the bottom of the third and fourth fixed vertical tubes and the joint of the two vertical tubes are respectively provided with a directional fork (par. 36). In re claim 7, Sun teaches the fold-up trailer shrinks, the bottom attachment rises, the side of the first bottom connecting pipe, the second bottom connecting pipe, the third bottom connecting pipe and the fourth bottom connecting pipe near the bottom connecting piece rises with the bottom connecting piece, one side of the first bottom connecting pipe, the second bottom connecting pipe, the third bottom connecting pipe and the fourth bottom connecting pipe near the bottom angle fixing piece is closed to the direction of the bottom connecting piece (clear from par. 29, 33-34). In re claim 8, Sun teaches the folding trailer shrinks, four of the linkage sliding sleeves simultaneously descend, the included angles on both sides of the first crossing tube and the second crossing tube and the included angles on both sides of the fifth crossing tube and the sixth crossing tube are increased, the angle between the lower ends of the second crossing tube and the third crossing tube and the angle between the fourth crossing tube and the fifth crossing tube are reduced, the included angle of the lower ends of the third and fourth crossing tubes and the included angle of the upper ends of the first and sixth crossing tubes are reduced (inherent – when the sliding seats are lowered, the horizontal length of each tube shrinks thereby affecting the angles as claimed; similarly, when the sliding seat is raised the horizontal length increases). In re claim 9, Sun teaches the fold-up trailer shrinks, the included angles on both sides of the first cross bend tube and the second cross bend tube and the included angles on both sides of the first cross straight tube and the second cross straight tube are increased, the included angle of the lower end of the first Cross Bend and the first cross straight tube and the included angle of the upper end of the second cross bend and the second cross straight tube are reduced (inherent – when the sliding seats are lowered, the horizontal length of each tube shrinks thereby affecting the angles as claimed; similarly, when the sliding seat is raised the horizontal length increases). In re claim 10, Sun teaches when the folding trailer shrinks, the fixed rod sleeve rises and the angle between the lower ends of the two shrinking sleeves decreases ((inherent – when the sliding seats are lowered, the horizontal length of each tube shrinks thereby affecting the angles claimed; similarly, when the sliding seat is raised the horizontal length increases). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/18 have been fully considered but they are directed to the claims as amended. An examination of the amended claims is provided above. 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 EREZ GURARI whose telephone number is (571)270-1156. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00AM-6:30PM. 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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571) 270-5985. 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. /EREZ GURARI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 15, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 18, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 29, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600395
MULTI CHILD STROLLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594857
SYSTEM SOLUTION FOR TWO-PHASE ELECTRIC MACHINE USED FOR VEHICLE PROPULSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594829
ELECTRIC WORK VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590439
WORKING VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589727
ENERGY CONTROL METHOD AND SYSTEM OF LIFT TRUCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
78%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+10.1%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 932 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