Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/536,479

ICE DISPENSING ICE CHEST

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 12, 2023
Examiner
CHEYNEY, CHARLES
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allow Rate
436 granted / 777 resolved
-13.9% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+43.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
837
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.9%
+13.9% vs TC avg
§102
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
§112
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 777 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, see p. 3, filed 12/15/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Gaston (US Patent No. 7,905,200) teaching a battery powered auger as evidenced in the rejection below. 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) 1 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giles (US Patent No. 6,758,047), and further in view of Gaston (US Patent No. 7,905,200). Re: Claims 1, Giles discloses the claimed invention including a device for delivering ice in an ice chest (12) without opening a lid of the ice chest comprising: a) the ice chest having a lid (13) and interior bottom (Fig. 2, Col. 2, lines 62-67, chest with lid and bottom); and b) an electrically powered auger (22, 26) positioned at the interior bottom of the ice chest (Fig. 2, Col. 41-45, auger for moving ice to exit out the side) and entirely within the ice chest for delivering ice within the interior bottom of the ice chest (Fig. 2 depicts auger entirely inside) out a side of the ice chest wherein the ice cubes in the ice chest can be removed from the interior of the container (Fig. 1, Col. 3, lines 46-53, electronically powered auger by motor for removing ice) except for the auger expressly using battery power However, Gaston teaches powering a motor (as found in Giles) with either a battery (66) or plug (30)(Figs. 3 and 9, Col. 5 & 6, lines 61-64, 35-39, battery powered pump drawing fluid through a narrow inlet functioning as a preliminary filter). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include battery powered auger as taught by Gaston, since Gaston states in column 6, lines 37-39 that such a modification is capable of being lightest in weight and most portable while maintaining motor control over dispensing ice. Re: Claims 6, Giles discloses the claimed invention including the container has a lid (13) (Col. 2, lines 62-65, lid). Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giles (US Patent No. 6,758,047) and Gaston (US Patent No. 7,905,200) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mullins, Jr. (US Patent No. 4,252,002). Re: Claim 2, Giles discloses the claimed invention including a cover (18) for the place (14) ice exits (Fig. 2) from except for expressly stating it closes. However, Mullins teaches the side can be closed (73) (Fig. 3 Col. 4, lines 56-60, closes exit). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include closing the ice outlet as taught by Mullins, since such a modification would prevent external contaminants from entering the ice chest as well as warmer air from pervading into the exit hastening the melting of the ice. Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giles (US Patent No. 6,758,047) and Gaston (US Patent No. 7,905,200) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Turner (US Patent No. 9,951,986). Re: Claims 3-4, Giles discloses the claimed invention except for a pump for melted ice. However, Turner teaches battery (111) powered pump (112) for removing filtered (114) melted ice to as outside of the container(Figs. 4 and 6, Col. 3 & 4, lines 2-8, 2-4, battery powered pump drawing fluid through a narrow inlet functioning as a preliminary filter), such that the melted ice is stored and filter below the exit (Fig. 3 & 6 depict the melted ice positioned below the lower most spot where ice is store thus underneath any exit) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a pump for removing melted water as taught by Turner, since Turner states in column 3, lines 31-33 that such a modification refreezes the accumulated water delivered to it by the water pump into ice cubes and to return these ice cubes to the ice chest, such that minimal water is ever wasted. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CHARLES P. CHEYNEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9971. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 4:30 pm. 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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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. /CHARLES P. CHEYNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 12, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 15, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599687
Fluid Dispenser With UV Sanitation
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595104
CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594576
REMOVABLE CLOSURE CAP FOR CONTAINERS CONTAINING AIR-CURABLE MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583011
DRIVE MECHANISM AND VISCOUS MATERIAL DISPENSING GUN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569914
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING FLOW THROUGH A 3D PRINTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
56%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+43.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 777 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