Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/502,443

Convertible Child Safety Seat Carrier

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Nov 06, 2023
Examiner
CHEN, JOSE V
Art Unit
3637
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
1684 granted / 2159 resolved
+26.0% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
2195
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
38.0%
-2.0% vs TC avg
§102
17.2%
-22.8% vs TC avg
§112
32.6%
-7.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 2159 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 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- 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zehfuss (‘855). The reference to Zehfuss teaches structure substantially as claimed including a carrier (10 comprising a chassis (120, 124) having a longitudinal axis, a handle (14) and a multi-purpose support (see fig 9 annotated below), the multi-purpose support comprising a first tube, a second tube, a crossbar, a rotational mount, a stationary support, and a movable support; the stationary support being a U-shaped structure having a first arm with a terminus, a second arm with a terminus, and a crossbar; the movable support being a U-shaped structure having a first arm with a terminus, a second arm with a terminus, a longitudinal axis, and a crossbar; each terminus of the movable support being connected to the rotational mount such that the movable support is capable of pivoting about the rotational mount, the movable support may be fixed in one or two positions, the crossbar of the movable support deflects from the longitudinal axis of the movable support (all material have a modulus of elasticity), in “which upward when the movable support Is in the second position and downward when the movable support is in the first position”. The rotational structures of Zehfuss provide the ability of rotation through an amount of at least 180 degrees by the orientation and structures shown in at least fig 1. To provide a specific amount would have been a matter of design parameters and choice which would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art and a reasonably predictable result. With respect to the amendments to the claims, it is noted that the structures of Zehfuss (at least at 14, 14, 103, 104, 110, 110A, multi purpose support (annotated), movable support (annotated) provide all structure as claimed including U-shaped and bend structures angled upwards and proximation (near) to the handle. PNG media_image1.png 434 693 media_image1.png Greyscale Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 15 SEP 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See remarks above in the rejections. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSE V CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6865. The examiner can normally be reached m-f, m-w 5:30-3:00, th5:30-2:00. 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, Daniel Troy can be reached at 571 270 3742. 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. /JOSE V CHEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 06, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 15, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 08, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599240
A LUMBAR SUPPORT ASSEMBLY AND RELATED METHOD, AND A BACKREST ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594487
JIGSAW PUZZLE TABLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589818
RIDER-POSTURE CHANGING ASSEMBLY FOR HUMAN-POWERED VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576760
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR MOUNTING A HEADREST FOR A VEHICLE SEAT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575666
FURNITURE WITH ORGANIZATIONAL FRAME
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+15.2%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 2159 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