Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/503,514

CRIBBING SYSTEM AND METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 07, 2023
Priority
Dec 06, 2022 — provisional 63/386,315
Examiner
LIN, CHENG XI
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Transportation IP Holdings, LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
260 granted / 307 resolved
+32.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
331
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
55.5%
+15.5% vs TC avg
§102
23.3%
-16.7% vs TC avg
§112
17.2%
-22.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 307 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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. DETAILED ACTION This is the first non-final office action on the merits. Claims 1-20 are currently pending. Priority The Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority under provisional Application No. FILLIN "Insert series code and serial no. of parent." 63/386,315 , filed on FILLIN "Enter the date filing of the parent application." 12/06/2022 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement s (IDS) submitted on 11/07/2023 and 07/31/2025 ha ve been received and considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings are accepted. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale , or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 FILLIN "Insert either \“(a)(1)\” or \“(a)(2)\” or both. If paragraph (a)(2) of 35 U.S.C. 102 is applicable, use form paragraph 7.15.01.aia, 7.15.02.aia or 7.15.03.aia where applicable." \d "[ 2 ]" (a)(1) as being FILLIN "Insert either—clearly anticipated—or—anticipated—with an explanation at the end of the paragraph." \d "[ 3 ]" anticipated by FILLIN "Insert the prior art relied upon." \d "[ 4 ]" Irion et al. (US 8910577 B2) . Regarding claim 1, Irion teaches (Fig. 1, 6-7, 10, and 25): A cribbing vehicle (20) comprising: a vehicle frame ( machine frame 32); a primary cribbing device (work head frame 40) coupled to the vehicle frame (32)(col. 4, lines 51-55) and having a work head ( arm 64 and replaceable tool 74) configured to move between rails of a track (Fig. 10-11); and an auxiliary cribbing system (tie pusher 110) removably coupled to the vehicle frame (32) in spaced relation to the primary cribbing device (40) and having a push arm (annotated Fig. 25 below) configured to move between a first tie and second tie (112) of the track (Fig. 25; col. 6, lines 30-36; col. 10, lines 8-20). Regarding claim 18, Irion teaches (Fig. 1, 6-7, 10, and 25): A method comprising: performing, with a primary cribbing device (40) , an initial cribbing between a first tie of a track and a second tie of the track between rails of the track (Fig. 1 and 6-7) ; and after the initial cribbing, performing a supplemental cribbing between the first tie of the track and the second tie of the track with an auxiliary cribbing device (tie pusher 110) , including cribbing under a rail of the rails of the track (Fig. 25) . 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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art relied upon." \d "[ 2 ]" Irion et al. (US 8910577 B2) . Regarding claim 10, Irion teaches ( Fig. 1): the primary cribbing device (40) and the vehicle frame (32), but does not explicitly teach that the primary cribbing device is a one-piece construction with the vehicle frame. However, constructing the vehicle components as a one-piece construction with a vehicle frame is well-known in the art, and it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for Irion to construct the cribbing device and the vehicle frame in one-piece, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would contribute to lower overall weight, higher structural rigidity, and manufacturing efficiency. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2 -9 and 19-20 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 claims . Claims 11-17 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 2 , the prior art fails to teach the auxiliary cribbing system is configured to move from a travel position where the push arm is coupled to the vehicle frame at a push arm first end and at a push arm second end, to a ready position where the push arm is coupled to the vehicle frame at only the push arm first end, and to a working position wherein the push arm is configured to be at least partially under a rail of the rails . While Irion further teaches (Fig. 1, 6-7, 10, and 25 ): the auxiliary cribbing system (110) is configured to move from a travel position (raised position) where the push arm is coupled to the vehicle frame (32) at a push arm first end and at a push arm second end (annotated Fig. 25 below ) , to a working position (fully lowered position) wherein the push arm is configured to be at least partially under a rail of the rails (Fig. 25) , the examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Irion to include a ready position where the push arm is coupled to the vehicle frame at only the push arm first end . Such a modification would require improper hindsight reasoning. Regarding c laim 3 and its depending claim(s) 4-9 , the prior art fails to teach a second actuating member coupled to the kicker frame between a second actuating member first end and a second actuating member second end, and coupled to the push arm at the second actuating member second end; and wherein the first frame pivot is aligned with a second frame pivot such that horizontal forces on the second actuating member are directed into the first actuating member . While Irion further teaches (Fig. 1, 6-7, 10, and 25 ): a second one of the two hydraulic cylinders (111) that may be interpreted as the second actuating member, the examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Irion such that the second actuating member is coupled to the kicker frame between a second actuating member first end and a second actuating member second end, and coupled to the push arm at the second actuating member second end; and wherein the first frame pivot is aligned with a second frame pivot such that horizontal forces on the second actuating member are directed into the first actuating member . Such a modification would require improper hindsight reasoning. Independent claim 11 and its depending claim(s) 12-17 are allowable for the same reasons as claims 2 and 3 above . Regarding c laim 19 an d its depending claim(s) 20, the prior art fails to teach the supplemental cribbing includes moving a push arm of the auxiliary cribbing device from a travel position to a ready position with a first actuating member of the auxiliary cribbing device and moving the push arm from the ready position to a working position with a second actuating member . While Irion further teaches (Fig. 1, 6-7, 10, and 25 ): the auxiliary cribbing system (110) is configured to move from a travel position (raised position) where the push arm is coupled to the vehicle frame (32) at a push arm first end and at a push arm second end (annotated Fig. 25 below ) , to a working position (fully lowered position) wherein the push arm is configured to be at least partially under a rail of the rails (Fig. 25) using actuating members (111), the examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Irion to include the method of moving a push arm of the auxiliary cribbing device from a travel position to a ready position with a first actuating member of the auxiliary cribbing device and moving the push arm from the ready position to a working position with a second actuating member . Such a modification would require improper hindsight reasoning Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure of a railway ballast cribbing system between ties : US-2309712-A , US-2358657-A , US-2574118-A , US-3403462-A , US-4355687-A , US-4464995-A , US-5579593-A , US-6463858-B2 , US-20130125775-A1 , US-11459707-B2 , CN 110952399 A, FR 2685365 A1 . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CHENG XI LIN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6102 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Mon. through Fri. 9:00am to 6:00pm EST . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 5712726684 . 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. /CHENG LIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 07, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12611891
COMPOSITE POWER WHEEL PAIR, TRAIN, WHEEL RAIL SYSTEM, AND TRAIN CONTROL METHOD
3y 3m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12612740
METHOD AND MACHINE FOR TAMPING A TRACK
2y 8m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12612084
Storage Assembly for Railcar
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12606964
HIGHLY AUTOMATED MODE OF ROAD TRAFFIC
3y 8m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12606028
Method for Detecting a Lowering of a Current Collector of a Vehicle
3y 0m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+14.2%)
3y 0m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 307 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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