Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/514,892

WALKING STICK WITH A PLURALITY OF SPRING-ACTIVATED FEET

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 20, 2023
Examiner
HAWK, NOAH CHANDLER
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
950 granted / 1545 resolved
+9.5% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
62 currently pending
Career history
1607
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
41.2%
+1.2% vs TC avg
§102
34.7%
-5.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1545 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 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. Claims 1-4, 6 and 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterholzer in US Patent 3645553 in view of Rise in US Patent 4742837. Regarding Claims 1-3, and 6, Hinterholzer teaches a walking stick comprising: a body comprising a second end (14); a central support (1) positioned at the second end of the body, the central support defined by a plurality of spring-loaded feet (6), each foot comprising: a first end attached (12) to an outer edge of the central support and an opposed second end (19) distally positioned from the first end; a top face and an opposed bottom face (see Fig. 5), wherein the bottom face includes a hinge (8); wherein the first end has a width that is less than a width of the second end; wherein each foot is configured to flex in an upward or downward direction at the hinge, above and below the central support in response to pressure; and wherein each foot is configured to flex independently of the other feet. Hinterholzer is silent on the details of the body of the walking stick. Rise teaches a walking stick comprising a body (P) comprising a first end (10) and an opposed second end (17), with a length therebetween; a central support (T) positioned at the second end of the body, wherein the first body end comprises a grip (G) comprising rubber, foam, plastic, fabric, or combinations thereof (“foamed rubber grip G” – Column 4, lines 28-29), wherein the body first end comprises a diameter that is greater than a diameter of the body second end (See Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hinterholzer by using a body for the walking stick as taught by Rise in order to provide suitable support for the user. Regarding Claim 4, Hinterholzer, as modified, is silent on the size of the body. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture the device with a length of about 3-6 feet and a diameter of about 0.5-3 inches in order to provide an appropriately sized device for the individual user, since such a change would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized a being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Regarding Claim 8, Hinterholzer, as modified, teaches that the central support includes a central bore (see Fig. 1) that enable attachment to the second end of the body. Regarding Claim 9, Hinterholzer, as modified, teaches that each foot is configured to rotate above (the end is angled above horizontal) and below horizontal (see Fig. 2). Regarding Claim 10, Hinterholzer, as modified, teaches (See Figs. 2 and 5) that each foot is configured to rotate about 5-75 degrees above or below horizontal. Regarding Claim 11, Hinterholzer, as modified, teaches that the feet are symmetrically arranged about an outer edge of the central support. Regarding Claims 12 and 13, Hinterholzer, as modified, is silent on the size of the feet. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture the feet of Hinterholzer, as modified, so that the first end of each foot has a width of about 0.5-2 inches and the second end of each foot has a width of about 1.5-5 inches and each foot has a thickness of about 0.1-1 inch in order to provide the appropriate size feet for the user’s need, since such a change would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized a being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Regarding Claim 14, Hinterholzer, as modified, teaches that each foot includes an extending point (19) at the second end that extends away from the first end of the foot. Regarding Claim 15, Hinterholzer, as modified, teaches that each foot includes a first extended configuration (Fig. 1) and a second flexed configuration (Fig. 2). Claims 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterholzer, as modified by Rise, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gillanders in US Publication 2008/0169012. Hinterholzer, as modified, teaches, through the normal and customary use of the device, a method of traversing terrain, the method comprising: positioning the walking stick of claim 1 adjacent to the terrain and exerting pressure on the first end of the walking stick that is transferred to the feet, whereby the feet extend in a first and extended configuration as the feet contact the terrain; pulling upward on the body of the walking stick to remove the feet from the terrain, whereby the feet of the walking stick flex into a second angled configuration as the walking stick is pulled from the terrain; wherein once the feet are removed from the terrain, they revert to the first extended configuration (see HInterholzer, Column 1, lines 4-13). Hinterholzer, as modified, is silent on the use of the device in muddy terrain. Gillanders teaches a method for using a walking device including traversing muddy terrain (see Paragraph 0006). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of HInterholzer, as modified, by using it on muddy terrain as taught by Gillanders in order to allow the user to traverse a mixed terrain including snow and mu using the same assistance device. Regarding Claim 17, Hinterholzer, as modified, teaches (See Figs. 2 and 5) that each foot is configured to rotate about 5-75 degrees above or below horizontal. Regarding Claim 18, Hinterholzer, as modified, teaches that each foot includes an extending point (19) at the second end that extends away from the first end of the foot. Regarding Claim 19, Hinterholzer, as modified, is silent on the size of the body. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture the device with a length of about 3-6 feet and a diameter of about 0.5-3 inches in order to provide an appropriately sized device for the individual user, since such a change would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized a being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Claims 1, 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterholzer in US Patent 3645553 in view of Ramer in US Patent 4288102. Hinterholzer teaches a walking stick comprising: a body comprising a second end (14); a central support (1) positioned at the second end of the body, the central support defined by a plurality of spring-loaded feet (6), each foot comprising: a first end attached (12) to an outer edge of the central support and an opposed second end (19) distally positioned from the first end; a top face and an opposed bottom face (see Fig. 5), wherein the bottom face includes a hinge (8); wherein the first end has a width that is less than a width of the second end; wherein each foot is configured to flex in an upward or downward direction at the hinge, above and below the central support in response to pressure; and wherein each foot is configured to flex independently of the other feet. Hinterholzer is silent on the details of the body of the walking stick. Ramer teaches a walking stick comprising a body (11) comprising a first end (32) and an opposed second end (33), with a length therebetween; a central support (16) positioned at the second end of the body, wherein the body comprises an adjustable length (at 38) and wherein the body second end comprises a diameter that is greater than a diameter of the body first end (see Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hinterholzer by using a body for the walking stick as taught by Rise in order to provide suitable support for the user. Claims 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinterholzer, as modified by Ramer, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gillanders in US Publication 2008/0169012. Hinterholzer, as modified, teaches, through the normal and customary use of the device, a method of traversing terrain, the method comprising: positioning the walking stick of claim 1 adjacent to the terrain and exerting pressure on the first end of the walking stick that is transferred to the feet, whereby the feet extend in a first and extended configuration as the feet contact the terrain; pulling upward on the body of the walking stick to remove the feet from the terrain, whereby the feet of the walking stick flex into a second angled configuration as the walking stick is pulled from the terrain; wherein once the feet are removed from the terrain, they revert to the first extended configuration (see HInterholzer, Column 1, lines 4-13). Hinterholzer, as modified, further teaches that the body has an adjustable length. Hinterholzer, as modified, is silent on the use of the device in muddy terrain. Gillanders teaches a method for using a walking device including traversing muddy terrain (see Paragraph 0006). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of HInterholzer, as modified, by using it on muddy terrain as taught by Gillanders in order to allow the user to traverse a mixed terrain including snow and mu using the same assistance device. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Reide, Collins, Ring, Jiang, McLain, and Petromallo teach baskets for walking sticks. Nelson et al. and Bruckl teach walking assistance bodies. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH C. HAWK whose telephone number is (571)272-1480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5:30pm. 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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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. NOAH C. HAWK Primary Examiner Art Unit 3636 /Noah Chandler Hawk/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 20, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599206
Umbrella Pole Brace Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599207
A Sliding Seat Assembly for an Umbrella
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582571
MOBILITY SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575998
CRUTCH WITH A CONTOURED GRIP AND A FOREARM SUPPORT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575651
Umbrella
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
62%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+22.0%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1545 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