Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/498,945

ENHANCED WHEELCHAIR MAINTENANCE LIFTING PLATFORM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 31, 2023
Examiner
HONG, SEAHEE
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
525 granted / 768 resolved
-1.6% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
794
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
38.1%
-1.9% vs TC avg
§102
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
§112
30.7%
-9.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 768 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 . 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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horn et al (US 8,517,401 B1). Regarding claim 1¸ as seen in fig 1, Horn et al (‘401) discloses a lifting platform (fig5) comprising: a base 12,28 (col.2 lines13-16); a riser portion 46 (col.2 line41) attached to the base 12,28 (fig5); a riser insert (col.2 lines50-53, figA, a portion which is slidably inserted into the riser portion 46) slidable within the riser portion 46 (col.2 lines50-53, figs1-2,5); a cradle 56 (col.2 line56, figs1) attached to the riser insert (figs1-2,A) and configured to lift a portion of an object (col.2 lines57-59); and a handle (figA, an outer tube portion of a leverage bar 36, col.2 line28) extending from the riser portion 46 (as seen in fig 5, the handle is indirectly extending from the riser portion via the base; It is noted that claim does not require the handle to be directly attached to the riser portion). However, Horn et al does not explicitly disclose that the lifting platform is used as a wheelchair lifting platform. It is noted that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In this case, Horn et al discloses each and every positively claimed structural limitations in the claim, therefore, it is clear that the lifting platform of Horn et al can be used as a wheelchair lifting platform and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the lifting platform of Horn et al as a wheelchair lifting platform to provide versatile uses of the lifting platform. PNG media_image1.png 608 568 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 1, wherein the cradle 56 is curved in shape (fig5). Regarding claim 3¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 1, wherein a height of the riser insert is adjustable by sliding the riser insert outward from the riser portion 46 (col.2 lines48-53). Regarding claim 4¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 1, wherein the base 12,28 comprises a first portion 28 (col.2 line14) perpendicular to the riser portion 46 (fig1) and a second portion 12 (col.2 line10) along a different lateral axis (fig5) than the first portion 12 (fig5). Regarding claim 5¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 4, wherein the cradle 56 is configured to engage the portion of the object when the first portion 28 of the base 12,28 is on the ground (fig1) and when the second portion 12 of the base 12,28 is on the ground (fig2). As aforementioned, the lifting platform of the Horn et al can be used as the wheelchair lifting platform, therefore, it is clear that the cradle of Horn et al is capable to engage a camber tube of the wheelchair. Regarding claim 6, Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 4, wherein pushing (downward, fig1) or pulling the handle causes the base 12,28 to move from a first position (fig1) with the second portion 12 on the ground while the cradle 56 engages the portion of the object to a second position (fig2) with the first portion 28 on the ground while the cradle 56 engages the portion of the objection (figs1-2). As aforementioned, the lifting platform of the Horn et al can be used as the wheelchair lifting platform, therefore, it is clear that the cradle of Horn et al is capable to engage a camber tube of the wheelchair. Regarding claim 7¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 1, further comprising a handle insert (figA, col.2 lines34-36) slidable within the handle to adjust a length of the handle insert extending from the handle (col.2 lines34-36). Regarding claim 8, as seen in fig 1, Horn et al (‘401) discloses a lifting platform (fig5) comprising: a riser portion 46 (col.2 line41); a riser insert (col.2 lines50-53, figA, a portion which is slidably inserted into the riser portion 46) slidable within the riser portion 46 (col.2 lines50-53, figs1-2,5); a cradle 56 (col.2 line56, figs1) attached to the riser insert (figs1-2,A) and configured to lift a portion of an object (col.2 lines57-59); and a handle (figA, an outer tube portion of a leverage bar 36, col.2 line28) extending from the riser portion 46 (as seen in fig 5, the handle is indirectly extending from the riser portion via an element 12; It is noted that claim does not require the handle to be directly attached to the riser portion). However, Horn et al does not explicitly disclose that the lifting platform is used as a wheelchair lifting platform. It is noted that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In this case, Horn et al discloses each and every positively claimed structural limitations in the claim, therefore, it is clear that the lifting platform of Horn et al can be used as a wheelchair lifting platform and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the lifting platform of Horn et al as a wheelchair lifting platform to provide versatile uses of the lifting platform. Regarding claim 9¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 8, further comprising: a base 12,28 (col.2 lines13-16) attached to the riser portion 46 (figs1,5). Regarding claim 10, Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 9, further comprising at least one gusset (figB) attached to the base 12,28 and configured to stabilize the riser portion 46. PNG media_image2.png 216 672 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 11¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 9, wherein the base 12,28 comprises a first portion 28 (col.2 line14) perpendicular to the riser portion 46 (fig1) and a second portion 12 (col.2 line10) along a different lateral axis (fig5) than the first portion 12 (fig5). Regarding claim 12, Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 11, wherein the cradle 56 is configured to engage the portion of the object when the first portion 28 of the base 12,28 is on the ground (fig1) and when the second portion 12 of the base 12,28 is on the ground (fig2). As aforementioned, the lifting platform of the Horn et al can be used as the wheelchair lifting platform, therefore, it is clear that the cradle of Horn et al is capable to engage a camber tube of the wheelchair. Regarding claim 13¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 11, wherein pushing (downward, fig1) or pulling the handle causes the base 12,28 to move from a first position (fig1) with the second portion 12 on the ground while the cradle 56 engages the portion of the object to a second position (fig2) with the first portion 28 on the ground while the cradle 56 engages the portion of the objection (figs1-2). As aforementioned, the lifting platform of the Horn et al can be used as the wheelchair lifting platform, therefore, it is clear that the cradle of Horn et al is capable to engage a camber tube of the wheelchair. Regarding claim 14¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 8, wherein the cradle 56 is curved in shape (fig5). Regarding claim 15¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 8, wherein a height of the riser insert is adjustable by sliding the riser insert outward from the riser portion 46 (col.2 lines48-53). Regarding claim 16¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 8, further comprising a handle insert (figA, col.2 lines34-36) slidable within the handle (col.2 lines34-36) Regarding claim 17¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 16, wherein a length of the handle insert extending from the handle is slidably adjustable (col.2 lines34-36). Regarding claim 18¸ as seen in fig 1, Horn et al (‘401) discloses a lifting platform (fig5) comprising: a riser insert (col.2 lines50-53, figA, a portion which is slidably inserted into the riser portion 46) slidable within a riser portion 46 (col.2 lines41,50-53, figs1-2,5); a cradle 56 (col.2 line56, figs1) attached to the riser insert (figs1-2,A) and configured to lift a portion of an object (col.2 lines57-59); and a handle (figA, an outer tube portion of a leverage bar 36, col.2 line28) extending from the riser portion 46 (as seen in fig 5, the handle is indirectly extending from the riser portion via an element 12; It is noted that claim does not require the handle to be directly attached to the riser portion). However, Horn et al does not explicitly disclose that the lifting platform is used as a wheelchair lifting platform. It is noted that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In this case, Horn et al discloses each and every positively claimed structural limitations in the claim, therefore, it is clear that the lifting platform of Horn et al can be used as a wheelchair lifting platform and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the lifting platform of Horn et al as a wheelchair lifting platform to provide versatile uses of the lifting platform Regarding claim 19, Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 18, further comprising: a base 12,28 (col.2 lines13-16) attached to the riser portion 46 (figs1,5); and at least one gusset (figB) attached to the base 12,28 and configured to stabilize the riser portion 46. Regarding claim 20¸ Horn et al teaches the wheelchair lifting platform of claim 19, wherein the base 12,28 comprises a first portion 28 (col.2 line14) perpendicular to the riser portion 46 (fig1) and a second portion 12 (col.2 line10) along a different lateral axis (fig5) than the first portion 12 (fig5). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Seahee Hong whose telephone number is (571)270-5778. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-4pm ET. 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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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. /SEAHEE HONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 31, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600013
Miter Clamp Tool Assembly and Method
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594411
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR JOINING METAL SLEEVE ONTO A TUBE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589980
Hand Tool with Slip Resistant Tip
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589623
MANEUVERABLE ERGONOMIC TRAILER STANDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581908
SUBSTRATE HOLDER AND METHOD FOR FIXING AND BONDING A SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+29.8%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 768 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