Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/497,375

TRACKED FORWARDER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 30, 2023
Examiner
HURLEY, KEVIN
Art Unit
3611
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Prinoth Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
969 granted / 1126 resolved
+34.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
1145
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
§102
51.4%
+11.4% vs TC avg
§112
28.4%
-11.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1126 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 . 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 “third plane” in claim 1 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 § 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. Claim(s) 1-11, 15-16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steben et al. US 9,604,679. Steben et al. discloses a tracked vehicle comprising: a body 12 extending in a longitudinal direction of the tracked vehicle, the body having a front end and a rear end defining a length of the body; a first track system 161 mounted on a first lateral side of the body and a second track system 162 mounted on a second lateral side of the body, each track system comprising a front end and a rear end defining a length Lta of the respective track system, each track system further comprising: a track 22 that comprises a ground-engaging outer surface and an inner surface opposite the ground-engaging outer surface, the track comprising a top run 40 and a bottom run 42, the ground-engaging outer surface of the bottom run defining an area of contact configured to engage the ground during use, and a track-engaging assembly configured to drive and guide the track around the track-engaging assembly, the track-engaging assembly comprising a plurality of track-contacting wheels 23, 24, 28 and a frame 15 supporting respective ones of the track-contacting wheels; an operator cabin 20 mounted to the body, the operator cabin comprising an operator interface 130 for allowing an operator of the tracked vehicle to enter operator commands to operate the tracked vehicle; and a powertrain 21 mounted to a portion of the body and comprising a prime mover; wherein the body comprises a front overhang portion and a rear overhang portion (See annotated Figure 9 below); wherein an entirety of the front overhang portion is above a second plane passing through a frontmost point of the bottom run of the track and defining an angle with a first plane defined by an area of contact of the track with flat ground; wherein a portion of the operator cabin is longitudinally in front of the front end of each track system; wherein the body is a chassis and the tracked vehicle comprises a platform 41 mounted on the chassis; wherein the track is a metal embedded rubber track (MERT) (see column 15 line 34). Steben et al. fails to disclose the recited dimensional characteristics. However, the recited dimensions are not per se critical to make the vehicle operable and are result effective variables which have a finite number of values and which would fulfill the design need to provide a vehicle sized depending on desired load size and to accommodate terrain and obstacles. Such dimensions are known design considerations (see col. 8 lines 52-65 and col. 10 lines 31-63) It has been held that when there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense. In that instance the fact that a combination was obvious to try might show that it was obvious under § 103. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007). PNG media_image1.png 541 782 media_image1.png Greyscale 4. Claim(s) 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steben et al. US 9,604,679. Steben et al., as noted above, discloses the claimed invention except for the platform being mounted to the chassis to be rotatable about an axis extending in the widthwise direction of the vehicle and including a motor for rotating the platform about the chassis. However, it is known in the art, as taught by Tamura et al. to mount a platform 13 to a tracked vehicle 61 about a widthwise axis and including a motor 14 for rotating the platform about a chassis of the vehicle. Such an arrangement allows fluent material to be carried on the vehicle and dumped at a desired location. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide the vehicle disclosed by Steben et al. with the rotatable platform disclosed by Tamura et al. in order to allow fluent material to be carried on the vehicle and dumped at a desired location Allowable Subject Matter Claims 12-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kevin Hurley whose telephone number is (571)272-6646. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9 am-5:30 pm Kevin.Hurley@USPTO.GOV. 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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at 571-272-6265. 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. /KEVIN HURLEY/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3611 February 19, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 30, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600181
WEIGHT DISTRIBUTING TRAILER HITCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595018
CART/TRAILER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589823
KICK SCOOTER PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589621
HIGH ARTICULATION TOWING RECEIVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589832
SEAT ATTACHMENT FOR ELECTRIC RECREATIONAL VEHICLE
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+11.2%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1126 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