Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/521,048

POST PULLING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Nov 28, 2023
Examiner
BESLER, CHRISTOPHER JAMES
Art Unit
3726
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
587 granted / 864 resolved
-2.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
916
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
37.2%
-2.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.3%
-18.7% vs TC avg
§112
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 864 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1 – 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation “said body being planar in manner, said body having a first side and a second side.” The limitation is indefinite for several reasons. First, Examiner notes that “planar” is commonly defined and understood as “two-dimensional in quality.” Because all physical elements, including the ‘body’ of the limitation, it is generally unclear as to how the entirety of the ‘body’ can be “planar.” Secondly, it is generally unclear as to Applicant’s intent regarding “in manner.” For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “said body having a first side and a second side, said first side being planar.” Claim 3 recites the limitation “wherein said at least one reinforcement member is oriented longitudinally on said body intermediate said first end and said second end.” Examiner notes that “intermediate” is commonly defined and understood as “being or occurring at the middle plate, stage, or degree or between extremes.” Therefore, Applicant’s intent regarding ‘oriented intermediate said first end and said second end’ is unclear. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “wherein said at least one reinforcement member is oriented longitudinally on said body between said first end and said second end.” Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 1 - 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nice (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0101508). As to claim 1, Nice teaches a post pulling device configured to assist in extraction of posts partially buried in a ground (abstract) wherein the post pulling device comprises: a body (figure 1, element 100 being the ‘body’; paragraph 21), said body having a first side and a second side (figure 5, bottom side of element 100 being the ‘first side’ and top side of element 100 being the ‘second side’), said body being planar on the first side (figure 5, bottom side of element 100), said body having a first end and a second end (figures 1 and 5, element 102 being the ‘first end’ and element 103 being the ‘second end’; paragraph 22), said body being manufactured from a rigid material (figure 1, element 100; paragraph 38); a post aperture (figures 1 and 4, element 140 being the ‘post aperture’; paragraph 22), said post aperture being formed in said body proximate said second end (figure 1, elements 140 and 103), said at least one post aperture being annular in shape (figure 1, element 140); a connection aperture (figure 1, element 130 being the ‘connection aperture’; paragraph 22), said connection aperture being formed in said body proximate said first end (figure 1, elements 130 and 102), said connection aperture configured to facilitate coupling said body to a fastener (figure 4, element 130; paragraph 26). Examiner notes that the T-post of Nice may reasonably be considered to be a ‘fastener’ (figure 4, element P being the ‘T-post’; paragraph 26) because it acts to ‘fasten’ a fencing to the ground. As to claim 2, Nice further teaches reinforcement member (figure 1, element 160 being the ‘reinforcement member’; paragraphs 21 – 22), said reinforcement member being elongated in shape (figure 1, element 160), said reinforcement member being secured to the second side of said body (figures 1 and 3, element 160). Examiner notes that the ‘magnet’ of Nice (element 160) may reasonably be considered to be a ‘reinforcement member’ because Nice teaches that the magnet is embedded into the body (figure 1, elements 160 and 100; paragraph 35). Therefore, if the magnet were removed from the body, there would be a void left in the body, which would act to reduce (at least minimally) the strength of the body). As to claim 3, Nice teaches that the reinforcement member is oriented longitudinally on said body between said first end and said second end (figure 1, elements 160, 102, and 103). 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) 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nice as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Williams (U.S. Patent Number 7,040,602). As to claim 4, Nice does not teach the post aperture including a beveled edge. Williams teaches a post pulling device configured to assist in extraction of posts partially buried in a ground (abstract) wherein the post pulling device comprises: a body (figures 1 and 2, element 14 being the ‘body’; column 2, lines 35 – 38); and a post aperture (figure 2, element 48 being the ‘post aperture’; column 3, lines 24 – 29). Williams further teaches the post aperture including a beveled edge (figure 2, element 56a being the ‘beveled edge’; column 3, lines 31 – 38), said beveled edge having an angle configured to facilitate engagement with a post (figure 2, element 56a; column 3, lines 31 – 38). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to provide the post aperture of Nice with a beveled edge, as taught by Williams, because Nice expressly teaches a hook being inserted into the post aperture (paragraph 27), and Williams expressly teaches that a beveled edge allows objects to be more easily inserted into the post aperture (column 3, lines 31 – 38). As to claim 5, Nice teaches that the body is manufactured from metal (figure 1, element 100; paragraph 38). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER BESLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 am - 7:30 pm (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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571)272-0993. 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. /CHRISTOPHER J. BESLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 28, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Mar 31, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 14, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595159
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR REBUILDING A SPREADER BEAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12570069
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR REPLACING STAGE ROLL UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569902
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING STAKING ASSEMBLY, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING HUB UNIT BEARING, STAKING DEVICE, STAKING ASSEMBLY, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569947
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SERVICING ENGINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564887
CHANGER DEVICE FOR CLAMPING HEADS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
82%
With Interview (+14.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 864 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