Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/560,421

SLIDING ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Nov 13, 2023
Examiner
GAITONDE, MEGHA MEHTA
Art Unit
1781
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
National University Corporation Tokai National Higher Education And Research System
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
40%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
77%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 40% of resolved cases
40%
Career Allow Rate
234 granted / 580 resolved
-24.7% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+36.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
630
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
55.4%
+15.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
§112
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 580 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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. Claim 3 is 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 3 recites the limitation "the hydroxyl groups" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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. Claims 1-4 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2010-255682 Inaba. Regarding claim 1, Inaba teaches a sliding assembly (paragraph 0001), comprising: a first sliding element (a rolling element) having a sliding surface, the first sliding element including a first base member and a first hard layer (DLC) as the sliding surface on a surface of the first base member (paragraph 0014); and a second sliding element (first or second member) having a sliding surface, the second sliding element including a second base member and a second hard layer (DLC) as the sliding surface on a surface of the second base member (paragraph 0014), wherein the sliding surface of the first sliding element and the sliding surface of the second sliding clement come in contact with each other (paragraph 0014) with a water layer in between to allow the first sliding element and the second sliding element to slide relative to each other (paragraph 0012), and both of the first hard layer in the first sliding element and the second hard layer in the second sliding element (paragraph 0010) includes a nanosilica layer supporting nanosilica particles (paragraph 0011, where “nano” is taught by the particle size). Regarding claim 2, Inaba teaches that at least one of the first hard layer or the second hard layer has a surface with hydroxyl groups (paragraph 0012, where water is constant changing from 2 H2O ↔ OH + H3O such that hydroxyl ions are present in the water lubricant, and the polarity of both hydroxyl and individual Si-O bonds create a bond between the silica particles and the hydroxyl group). Regarding claim 3, Inaba teaches that the nanosilica layer is supported by the at least one of the first hard layer or the second hard layer (paragraph 0010) based on covalent bonds between the hydroxyl groups activated in the at least one of the first hard layer or the second hard layer and hydroxyl groups in the nanosilica particles (paragraph 0012, teaching water as the lubricant). Regarding claim 4, Inaba teaches that each of the first hard layer in the first sliding element and the second hard layer in the second sliding element (paragraph 0014) includes the nanosilica layer (paragraph 0012). Regarding claim 8, Inaba teaches that at least one of the first hard layer in the first sliding element or the second hard layer in the second sliding element is a part of at least one of the first base member or the second base member (paragraph 0009). Regarding claim 9, Inaba teaches that the first base member including the first hard layer comprises a ceramic material (paragraph 0009, layer D4). Regarding claim 10, Inaba teaches that the first hard layer in the first sliding element is a part of the first base member, and the second hard layer in the second sliding element is a part of the second base member (paragraph 0009), and each of the first base member including the first hard layer and the second base member including the second hard layer comprises a ceramic material (paragraph 0004, layer D4). Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2010-255682 Inaba with evidence from JP 6-095090 Niiyama et al. Regarding claim 5, Inaba teaches the sliding assembly with diamond-like carbon forming both first and second hard layers (0009). Inaba does not explicitly teach the hardness of the layer. Niiyama teaches a rolling and sliding surface where a diamond-like coating material has a hardness of 1000 to 7000 HV (paragraph 0033). Therefore, because Niiyama teaches that DLC has a hardness of 1000 to 7000 HV, the DLC of Inaba would also have a hardness of 1000 to 7000 HV. Regarding claim 6, Inaba teaches that the first hard layer in the first sliding element and the second hard layer in the second sliding element comprises diamond-like carbon on a surface of the first base member and the second base member, respectively (paragraph 0014). Regarding claim 7, Inaba teaches that the diamond-like carbon comprises silicon (paragraph 0010, in the form of silica). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Megha M Gaitonde whose telephone number is (571)270-3598. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am to 5 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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 571-270-1547. 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. /MEGHA M GAITONDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 13, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600660
ANTIBACTERIAL GLASS COMPOSITION, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING ANTIBACTERIAL GLASS COATING FILM USING SAME, AND HOME APPLIANCE COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576610
LAMINATED GLASS INTERLAYER FILM AND LAMINATED GLASS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573552
ELECTRONIC COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12558865
WINDOW AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12555709
GRAIN-ORIENTED ELECTRICAL STEEL SHEET
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
40%
Grant Probability
77%
With Interview (+36.5%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 580 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