Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/540,061

GRIP ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Dec 14, 2023
Examiner
DAVIS-HOLLINGTON, OCTAVIA L
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Illinois Tool Works Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
955 granted / 1121 resolved
+17.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
1165
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
46.8%
+6.8% vs TC avg
§102
40.2%
+0.2% vs TC avg
§112
8.8%
-31.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1121 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “hydraulic piston head 275” and “core member 820” as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the phrase “Disclosed example”. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: “Grip assembly for holding a testing sample in a material testing machine”. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informality: On line 12, it appears that “potion” should be portion. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1 – 3 and 15 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yin et al. (CN207689272, hereinafter Yin – See IDS dated 12/14/23). Regarding claim 1, Yin discloses an apparatus comprising a core member 21 (See Fig. 2) extending along a central axis from a first end portion, configured to releasably mount a grip assembly (pneumatic wedge clamp jaw) to a crosshead (connection member) 5, to a second end portion, wherein the core member comprises a body portion having a pneumatic cylinder cover 22 for a cylinder and enclosing a pneumatic volume 25, a pneumatic piston head 31 arranged to be slidably received in the pneumatic cylinder and to be moveable along the pneumatic cylinder in a first direction to expand the pneumatic volume, and in a second, opposing, direction to contract the pneumatic volume; a housing 2 (See Fig. 1), including a sleeve member coaxially mounted around the body portion so that the housing is moveable relative to the core member in a first axial direction towards the first end portion and in a second, opposing axial direction; a sample holder 12 disposed at the second end portion, configured to selectively apply a holding force to a sample for testing; and a driving member 27 configured to engage the sample holder; wherein the grip assembly is configured so that, in response to the pneumatic piston head moving in the first direction, the housing moves in the first axial direction thereby urging the driving member against the sample holder to provide a holding force (See Pg. 4, Paras. 1 – 8 and Pg. 5, Para. 9). Regarding claim 2, the pneumatic cylinder cover 22 is oriented to be coaxial with the central axis of the core member 21 so that the first direction of movement of the pneumatic piston head is in the first axial direction, and the second direction of movement is in the second axial direction (See Fig. 2). Regarding claim 3, the pneumatic piston head 31 is provided on a head member 33 configured to move relative to the core member in the first direction and the second direction (See Fig. 2). Regarding claim 15, the sample holder 12 is mounted to the second end portion of the core member and the driving member 27 extends from the housing to contact and engage the sample holder (See Figs. 1 and 2). Regarding claim 16, the sample holder 12 is mounted to the driving member 27 and is configured to abut the second end portion so that the second end portion prevents the sample holder from moving with the driving member in first axial direction (See Fig. 1). Regarding claim 17, the sample holder 11, 12 comprises a mutually-opposed pair of jaws, wherein at least one of the pair of jaws is configured to slidably move in a direction transverse to the central axis (See Fig. 2). Regarding claim 18, the sample holder 12 comprises a pre-set spacing between the pair of jaws prior to applying the holding force to the sample (See Fig. 2). Regarding claim 19, the driving member 27 includes a mutually-opposed pair of engaging faces, wherein each engaging face is configured to contact and engage the sample holder 11, 12 and thereby urge the sample holder to provide the holding force (See Fig. 2). Regarding claim 20, the core member 21 includes a spacer element 26 disposed between the second end portion and the body portion (See Fig. 2). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4 – 14 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 claim and any intervening claims.11. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reasons for indicating allowable subject matter is that the prior art does not anticipate or make obvious the provisions of “a hydraulic system having a primary hydraulic cylinder formed in the housing, wherein the primary hydraulic cylinder encloses a primary hydraulic volume, and wherein the housing is configured to engage with the body portion so that the primary hydraulic volume expands when housing moves relative to the core member in the first axial direction and contracts when the housing moves relative to the core member in the second, opposing, axial direction” (referring to claim 4), “the primary hydraulic cylinder has a primary cross-sectional area” (referring to claim 5), “the primary hydraulic cylinder is oriented to be coaxial with the central axis of the core member” (referring to claim 6), “the hydraulic system further comprises at least one secondary hydraulic cylinder, enclosing a secondary hydraulic volume that is fluidly connected to the primary hydraulic volume, wherein a hydraulic piston head is arranged to be slidably received in each of the at least one secondary hydraulic cylinders and to be moveable there along in a third direction to contract the secondary hydraulic volume, and in a fourth, opposing, direction to expand the secondary hydraulic volume” (referring to claim 7), “as the pneumatic piston head moves in the first direction, each hydraulic piston head moves in the third direction thereby contracting the secondary hydraulic volume and expanding the primary hydraulic volume” (referring to claim 8), “the hydraulic piston heads are configured to move in the first direction a distance in a range from 5mm to 60mm” (referring to claim 9), “each of the at least one secondary hydraulic cylinder is formed through the body portion” (referring to claim 10), “the head member has the at least one hydraulic piston head mounted thereto so that the at least one hydraulic piston head is arranged to project from the head member a direction towards the first end portion of the core member” (referring to claim 11), “the at least one secondary hydraulic cylinder comprises a plurality of secondary hydraulic cylinders” (referring to claim 12), “each of the at least one secondary hydraulic cylinders includes a secondary central axis, and wherein each secondary central axis is arranged parallel to the central axis of the core member and the grip assembly includes at least two secondary hydraulic cylinders, wherein the respective secondary central axes are arranged circumferentially around the central axis of the core member” (referring to claim 13), and “the at least one secondary hydraulic cylinders cumulatively provide a secondary cross-sectional area, and wherein a ratio of the primary cross-sectional area: the secondary cross-sectional area is in a range of from 1:2 to 1:20” (referring to claim 14) in combination with the other limitations presented in claim 1. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.13. Wallace (12,186,003) discloses a bi-directional pneumatic impactor for orthopedic devices. Greer, Jr. (11,525,762) discloses a material testing system having improved hydraulic wedge clips. Greer, Jr. (12,216,093) discloses a material testing system having improved hydraulic wedge clips. Anderson et al. (7,921,689) disclose pneumatic biasing of a linear actuator and implementations thereof. Lemmer et al. (7,739,919) disclose a test specimen holder. Ferguson (6,422,090) discloses an apparatus for a thermodynamic material testing system that produces very large strains in crystalline metallic specimens and accompanying methods for use therein. Gram (3,320,798) discloses a hydraulic alignment head for specimen testing.14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OCTAVIA HOLLINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2176. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm. 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, John Breene can be reached at 5712724107. 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. /OCTAVIA HOLLINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 11/25/25
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 14, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584808
TORQUE SENSOR ELEMENT AND TORQUE SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571694
SENSOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING A RELATIVE ANGULAR POSITION BETWEEN SHAFT HALVES OF A ROTARY SHAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12553699
INSPECTION METHOD, MANUFACTURING METHOD AND INSPECTION SYSTEM OF DISK DRIVE SUSPENSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12553783
MAGNETOELASTIC TORQUE SENSOR WITH EXTENDED COMPENSATION FOR INTERFERENCE FIELDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12551978
METHOD FOR DETERMINING A PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION OF A MOLDING TOOL DEVICE AS WELL AS RESHAPING APPARATUS AND COMPOSITE SHEET METAL COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
85%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+5.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1121 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