Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/519,812

WEATHERPROOF COVER FOR RECEPTACLE IN SINGLE-GANG HOUSING

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Nov 27, 2023
Examiner
GUGGER, SEAN A
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Hubbell Incorporated
OA Round
2 (Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
434 granted / 677 resolved
-3.9% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
718
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.2%
-37.8% vs TC avg
§103
51.1%
+11.1% vs TC avg
§102
18.0%
-22.0% vs TC avg
§112
24.7%
-15.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 677 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 17 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claims 1 and 16, as GE clearly teaches a receptacle with a three-gang configuration, it is now cited to teach this limitation. Regarding claim 12, as stated in Applicant’ arguments Leopold explicitly teaches a two-gang receptacle, this is a multi-gang configuration. Regarding claims 1, 12, and 16, Ustianowski teaches a single-gang receptacle. Inherently the rear side has a single-gang configuration. Thus, Ustianowski teaches this limitation. 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. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ustianowski (US 2022/0115852), in view of Leopold (US 2010/0078190) and General Electric (“GE”; http://www.homedepot.com/p/GE-6-Outlet-Grounded-Adapter-Spaced-Tap-50759/203724441, dated 23 September 2017, accessed 28 October 2025, document attached). Regarding claim 1: Ustianowski discloses a cover assembly (10, Fig. 1-3) for a receptacle (paragraph 0002) comprising: a base (12) having a back wall (16) and a plurality of sidewalls (14A-D) extending from the back wall (Fig. 2), wherein a central opening (24) is provided in the back wall, the central opening corresponding in size to a single-gang receptacle housing (paragraph 0029: Fig. 2 is a single-gang housing); a receptacle connected to the base (inherent, see 34) having a rear section having a single-gang configuration (as Fig. 2 is a single-gang housing); and a cover (50) connected to the base, the cover being pivotable between an open position (Fig. 2) providing access to the receptacle and a closed position (Fig. 1) enclosing the receptacle. Ustianowski does not explicitly disclose the receptacle having a front section with having a multi-gang configuration with a plurality of outlets and a rear section extending through the central opening, the rear section including a terminal for making an electrical connection to a power supply. However, Leopold discloses the receptacle (102a) having a front section with a plurality of outlets (Fig. 1) and a rear section (Fig. 3) extending through the central opening (105), the rear section including a terminal (112) for making an electrical connection to a power supply (paragraph 0024). And, GE discloses a front section with having a multi-gang configuration with a plurality of outlets (as it’s a three-gang outlet). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cover of Ustianowski to include the receptacle of Leopold in order to effectively provide a source of power, and to modify the receptable of Ustianowski to include the multi-gang outlets of GE in order to increase the number of possible connections. Regarding claim 2: Ustianowski modified by Leopold disclose the receptacle includes outlets, but do not explicitly disclose the receptacle includes at least three outlets. However, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the outlets to include at least three in order to increase the number of devices that can be plugged in. Regarding claim 3: Ustianowski modified by Leopold disclose the receptacle, Ustianowski further discloses the back wall of the base has a recessed area (to allow for 34 and 36, Fig. 4) surround the central opening (24) configured to receive the front section of the receptacle. Regarding claim 4: Ustianowski modified by GE disclose the receptacle, GE further discloses the front section of the receptacle has a three-gang configuration (see figure). Regarding claim 5: Ustianowski modified by Leopold disclose the receptable, but do not explicitly disclose the receptacle includes a first front face having a first outlet and a second front face having a second outlet, wherein first front face is oriented at an oblique angle relative to the second front face. However, GE discloses the receptacle includes a first front face having a first outlet and a second front face having a second outlet, wherein first front face is oriented at an oblique angle relative to the second front face (as shown by the figure, there are 3 faces, each with 2 outlets, with the two side faces at an oblique angle). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the receptacle have the faces of GE in order to allow for more outlets. Regarding claim 6: Ustianowski discloses the base includes a keyhole slot (28A-B) and a keyhole cover (38A-B). Regarding claim 7: Ustianowski discloses a flange (50A, Fig. 5) defines an outer edge of the base side walls (as shown in Fig. 5). Regarding claim 8: Ustianowski discloses the cover is configured to be connected to the base in a vertical orientation or a horizontal orientation (via horizontal hinge 32). Regarding claim 9: Ustianowski discloses the cover is connected to the base by a removable pin (56). Regarding claim 10: Ustianowski modified by Leopold disclose outlets, Leopold further discloses at least one of the outlets is a three-prong outlets (Fig. 1). Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ustianowski, Leopold, and GE as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee (US 4,845,312). Regarding claim 11: Ustianowski discloses the base side walls, but does not explicitly disclose the base side walls include a first passage and a second passage, and wherein a gate is removably positioned in the first passage and the second passage. However, Lee discloses the base side walls (16, Fig. 1) include a first passage and a second passage (both 12), and wherein a gate (22) is removably positioned in the first passage and the second passage (column 1, lines 55-64). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the base side walls of Ustianowski to include the passages and gates of Lee in order to improve the security and connection of the assembly (column 1, lines 10-12). Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ustianowski, in view of Leopold. Regarding claim 12: Ustianowski discloses a cover assembly (10, Fig. 1-3) for a receptacle (paragraph 0002) comprising: a base (12) having a back wall (16) and a plurality of sidewalls (14A-D) extending from the back wall (Fig. 2), wherein a central opening (24) is provided in the back wall, the central opening corresponding in size to a single-gang receptacle housing (paragraph 0029: Fig. 2 is a single-gang housing); a receptacle connected to the base (inherent, see 34) with a single-gang configuration (as Fig. 2 is a single-gang housing); and a cover (50) connected to the base, the cover being pivotable between an open position (Fig. 2) providing access to the receptacle and a closed position (Fig. 1) enclosing the receptacle. Ustianowski does not explicitly disclose the receptacle having a front section with a plurality of outlets and a rear section extending through the central opening, the rear section including a terminal for making an electrical connection to a power supply. However, Leopold discloses the receptacle (102a) having a front section with a multi-gang configuration (paragraph 0022, the invention can apply to a double gang receptacle) and a rear section (Fig. 3) extending through the central opening (105), the rear section including a terminal (112) for making an electrical connection to a power supply (paragraph 0024). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cover of Ustianowski to include the receptacle of Leopold in order to effectively provide a source of power. Regarding claim 13: Ustianowski modified by Leopold disclose the receptacle, Ustianowski further discloses the back wall of the base has a recessed area (to allow for 34 and 36, Fig. 4) surround the central opening (24) configured to receive the front section of the receptacle. Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ustianowski and Leopold as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of GE. Regarding claim 14: Ustianowski discloses a receptacle, but does not explicitly disclose the front section of the receptacle has a three-gang configuration. However, GE disclose the receptacle, GE further discloses the front section of the receptacle has a three-gang configuration (see figure). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the receptacle have the faces of GE in order to allow for more outlets. Regarding claim 15: Ustianowski modified by Leopold disclose the receptacle, but do not explicitly disclose the receptacle includes a first front face having a first outlet and a second front face having a second outlet, wherein first front face is oriented at an oblique angle relative to the second front face. However, GE discloses the receptacle includes a first front face having a first outlet and a second front face having a second outlet, wherein first front face is oriented at an oblique angle relative to the second front face (as shown by the figure, there are 3 faces, each with 2 outlets, with the two side faces at an oblique angle). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the receptacle have the faces of GE in order to allow for more outlets. Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ustianowski, in view of Leopold, Lee, and GE. Regarding claim 16: Ustianowski discloses a cover assembly (10, Fig. 1-3) for a receptacle (paragraph 0002) comprising: a base (12) having a back wall (16) and a plurality of sidewalls (14A-D) extending from the back wall (Fig. 2), wherein a central opening (24) is provided in the back wall, the central opening corresponding in size to a single-gang receptacle housing (paragraph 0029: Fig. 2 is a single-gang housing); a receptacle connected to the base (inherent, see 34); and a cover (50) connected to the base, the cover being pivotable between an open position (Fig. 2) providing access to the receptacle and a closed position (Fig. 1) enclosing the receptacle. Ustianowski does not explicitly disclose at least one of the plurality of sidewalls includes a first passage; a gate removably positioned in the first passage; a front section with having a multi-gang configuration with a plurality of outlets and a rear section extending through the central opening, the rear section including a terminal for making an electrical connection to a power supply. However, Lee discloses at least one of the plurality of sidewalls (16) includes a first passage (12); a gate (22) removably positioned in the first passage (column 1, lines 55-64). And, Leopold discloses However, Leopold discloses the receptacle (102a) having a front section with a plurality of outlets (Fig. 1) and a rear section (Fig. 3) extending through the central opening (105), the rear section including a terminal (112) for making an electrical connection to a power supply (paragraph 0024). And, GE discloses a front section with having a multi-gang configuration with a plurality of outlets (as it’s a three-gang outlet). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the base side walls of Ustianowski to include the passages and gates of Lee in order to improve the security and connection of the assembly (column 1, lines 10-12) and to modify the cover of Ustianowski to include the receptacle of Leopold in order to effectively provide a source of power, and to modify the receptable of Ustianowski to include the multi-gang outlets of GE in order to increase the number of possible connections. Regarding claim 17: Ustianowski modified by Leopold disclose the receptacle, Ustianowski further discloses the back wall of the base has a recessed area (to allow for 34 and 36, Fig. 4) surround the central opening (24) configured to receive the front section of the receptacle. Regarding claim 18: Ustianowski modified by GE disclose the receptacle, GE further discloses the front section of the receptacle has a three-gang configuration (see figure). Regarding claim 19: Ustianowski the cover is configured to selectively connect to the base in a first orientation (via 52) and a second orientation (via 54). Regarding claim 20: Ustianowski modified by Leopold disclose the receptacle, but do not explicitly disclose the front section of the receptacle has a three-gang configuration. However, GE discloses the front section of the receptacle has a three-gang configuration (three gang, each with gang with 2 outlets). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the receptacle have the three-gang configuration of GE in order to allow for more outlets. 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 SEAN GUGGER whose telephone number is (571)272-5343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:00am - 5:00pm 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, T.C. Patel can be reached at 571 272 2098. 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. /SEAN GUGGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 27, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 17, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597744
Connector
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592598
SYSTEMS FOR ROTOR INCLUDING COMPOSITE MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592592
A COOLING DEVICE FOR AN ELECTRIC MOTOR STATOR AND A MANUFACTURING PROCESS THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586964
GROMMET AND INLET ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586955
PROTECTIVE COMPONENT OF CONNECTOR SOCKET AND PROTECTIVE PLUG CAP THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
64%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+23.4%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 677 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