Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/544,054

Handrail Work Bench

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Dec 18, 2023
Examiner
WHITE, RODNEY BARNETT
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
1790 granted / 2169 resolved
+30.5% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
2206
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
34.9%
-5.1% vs TC avg
§102
34.2%
-5.8% vs TC avg
§112
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 2169 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
October 17, 2025 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 . Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because Applicant uses the word “invention” on line 1, which is improper language for the Abstract. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “said throat (being) essentially square to accommodate a square or rectangular vertical member of a railing or fence”, as defined in claims 5, 11, and 16, and “wherein said brackets are essentially semi-circular to accommodate round horizontal members of a railing or fence”, as defined in claim 6 and 17, and must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The drawings do not show a “square throat”. No new matter should be entered. 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. 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 1-18 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. In claim 1, line 2, “the vertical member” lacks antecedent basis. Applicant does not describe where the “throat” is located on the “plate” that allows it “to accommodate the vertical member of a railing or fence” nor does he describe where the “brackets” are located “to accommodate horizontal members of said railing or fence” In claim 3, Applicant does describe where the “cushion” is located. The claim simply reads “which further comprises a cushion.” In claim 8, line 2, “the vertical member” lacks antecedent basis. Applicant does not describe where the “throat” is located on the “plate” that allows it “to accommodate the vertical member of a railing or fence” nor does he describe where the “brackets” are located “to accommodate horizontal members of said railing or fence” In claim 9, Applicant does not describe where the “screw holes” are located on the “plate” that allows the “plate” to “accommodate screws for means of fastening two or more handrail work benches together.” In claim 14, line 2, “the vertical member” lacks antecedent basis. In claim 14, Applicant simply lists “brackets, and a cushion,” and “a carrying handle, and screw holes to accommodate screws for means of fastening two or more handrail work benches together” but does not describe where they are located or their interconnection to the other structures defined in the claim as Applicant has done in claims. Applicant does not describe where the “throat” is located on the “plate” that allows it “to accommodate the vertical member of a railing or fence” nor does he describe where the “brackets” are located “to accommodate horizontal members of said railing or fence” The aforementioned problems render the claims vague and indefinite. Clarification and/or correction is required. 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, 3-8, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIM DUK SOO (KR 100998448 B1) in view of 박용호 (KR 20150002452 U). PNG media_image1.png 166 214 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 160 208 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 130 176 media_image3.png Greyscale KIM DUK SOO teaches the structure substantially as claimed including a handrail work bench comprising a plate 30, wherein said plate further comprises a throat 122 (123) adapted to accommodate the vertical member 20 of a railing or fence but does not teach brackets that are adapted to accommodate horizontal members of said railing or fence. PNG media_image4.png 272 256 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 288 206 media_image5.png Greyscale However, KR 20150002452 U teaches a similar handrail work bench that teaches a bracket that is includes a hole 431 that is adapted to accommodate horizontal members 20 of said railing or fence. KR 20150002452 U also teaches that the handrail work bench has a cushion 46. It would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify the handrail work bench, as taught by KIM DUK SOO, to include brackets that are adapted to accommodate horizontal members of a railing or fence, such as he one taught by KR 20150002452 U, since it would provide the handrail work bench as taught by KIM DUK SOO, the ability to be attached to both vertical and horizontal members of a railing or fence. As for Claims 4 and 10, KIM DUK SOO teach that said throat is essentially semi-circular to accommodate a round vertical member of a railing or fence. As for Claims 7 and 13, KIM DUK SOO teach that said brackets are essentially square to accommodate a square or rectangular horizontal member of a railing or fence. As for Claims 5-6 and 11-12, KIM DUK SOO does not teach that said throat is essentially square to accommodate a square or rectangular vertical member of a railing or fence or that said brackets are essentially semi-circular to accommodate round horizontal members of a railing or fence. However, the shapes of the throat or the brackets are nothing more than design choice that lacks patentable weight since vertical and horizontal members of a fence or railing can have circular, rectangular, or any other cross sectional shape and a “throat” and a bracket are capable of being made in any shape that to accommodate vertical and horizontal members of a railing or fence. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIM DUK SOO (KR 100998448 B1) in view of 박용호 (KR 20150002452 U), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sadan (U.S. Patent No. 4,746,166). KIM DUK SOO (KR 100998448 B1) in view of 박용호 (KR 20150002452 U) teaches the structure substantially as claimed bot does not teach that said plate further comprises a carrying handle. PNG media_image6.png 272 176 media_image6.png Greyscale However, Sadan teaches the concept of providing handles 24,26 to a portable seat. It would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify the handrail work bench, as taught by KIM DUK SOO (KR 100998448 B1) in view of 박용호 (KR 20150002452 U), to include a handle, as taught by Sadan, since it would provide the handrail work bench with a handle that would allow the handrail work bench to be caried when folded and carried, making it easy for transport to and from storage or when being moved from one work space to another. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 14-18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because it teaches structures and concepts similar to those of the present invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rodney B. White whose telephone number is (571)272-6863. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM-5:00 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, David R. Dunn can be reached at (571) 272-6670. 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. /Rodney B White/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594862
BABY CARRIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593917
FOLDING RECLINER WITH GUIDE MECHANISMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588769
CONVERTIBLE INFANT CHAIR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588763
SEATING FURNITURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589683
SEAT PAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+17.7%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 2169 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