Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/564,808

OUTDOOR POWER MACHINE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Nov 28, 2023
Examiner
TRAN, JULIA C
Art Unit
3671
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Greenworks (Jiangsu) Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
102 granted / 163 resolved
+10.6% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
204
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
48.4%
+8.4% vs TC avg
§102
27.6%
-12.4% vs TC avg
§112
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 163 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 01-27-2026 is acknowledged. Claims 8-11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Specification 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: Outdoor Power Machine with Speed Range Selection. 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 7 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 7 recites the limitation "the distal end" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Holeton et al. (US 20230122499 A1). Regarding claim 1, Holeton discloses an outdoor power machine (10, Fig. 1), comprising: a chassis (20); two or more drive wheel assemblies (rear drive wheels 35) physically mounted to the chassis, each drive wheel assembly coupled to an electric motor (45) (Fig. 3, para. [0093] “electric…drive motors 45 may each include an output shaft that is directly coupled to one of the drive wheels 35”); an electric power pack (50) configured to supply electric energy to the electric motors (para. [0094]); one or more steer wheels (front caster wheels 30 passively steer mower); a steering lever (72); a speed control button (410) positioned on the steering lever (Fig. 16, speed adjustment mechanism 410 is “a button or dial switch…integrated within the maneuvering controls 72…during operation…the user may easily access the adjustment mechanism 410 without removing their hands from the maneuvering controls 72…to safely switch between the different selections, para. [0144]); and wherein the speed control button is configured to send a signal to a control system (400) such that the control system sequentially selects a gross speed range (para. [0145] “adjustment mechanism 410 may include three positions such as…low, standard, or maximum speed modes 420, 430, 440”, e.g. corresponding to speed ranges of 0-5 mph, 0-8 mph, and 0-11 mph, respectively, see Fig. 17A, para. [0147]). Regarding claim 2, Holeton discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1, wherein the control system (400) is configured to sequentially cycle through a predetermined set of speed ranges (Fig. 16, para. [0145] sequentially cycles through “three preset adjusted maximum speed modes”, e.g. low [Wingdings font/0xE0] standard [Wingdings font/0xE0] high speed range). Regarding claim 3, Holeton discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 2, wherein there are three speed ranges (420, 430, 440) that each have different maximum speeds (Fig. 17A, maximum speeds of 5 mph, 8 mph, 11mph, respectively). Regarding claim 4, Holeton discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 3, wherein the speed ranges (420, 430, 440) are low, medium, and high (Fig. 16). Regarding claim 5, Holeton discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1, wherein the speed control button (410) is configured to control the speed of at least one of the drive wheel assembly (35) (para. [0147]). Regarding claim 7, Holeton discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1, wherein the speed control button (410) is positioned at the distal end of the steering lever (inherent from para. [0144] button is “positioned on or integrated within the maneuvering controls 72“ so as to be “operable with the user's thumb” in para. [0144]). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holeton as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Feng et al. (US 20200253115 A1). Regarding claim 6, Holeton discloses the outdoor power machine of claim 1, wherein the speed control button (410) is configured to control the speed of the drive wheel assemblies (35) instead of the speed of a means (40) for driving a blade (84). Feng in the same area of riding mowers discloses a vehicle speed control button (1090) and a blade speed control button (1095), wherein the vehicle speed control button and blade speed control button are configured to sequentially select between vehicle speeds (1405, 1420) and blade speeds (1435, 1440) respectively (Figs. 31-32, para. [0109-0110]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include an additional speed control button on the steering lever of Holeton for selecting a blade speed, in order to optimize power management and allow a user to selectively choose between blade speeds as desired for different lawn conditions. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Li et al. (US 20240130276 A1) discloses a riding mower with variable blade and drive speed. Bejcek (US 20240081175 A1) discloses a drive speed selector button disposed on the distal end of a steering lever. Jager et al. (US 20200128727 A1) discloses a system ad method of controlling blade speed of a mower. Matsuda et al. (US 20180338417 A1) discloses a grass mower having different operating modes. Bryant et al. (US 20170196164 A1) discloses a various speed modes for a mower. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA C TRAN whose telephone number is (571) 272-8758. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 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, Joesph Rocca, can be reached on (571) 272-8971. 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 httos://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. /JULIA C TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3671 /JOSEPH M ROCCA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 28, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593754
ROUND BALER CROP PICKUPS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588595
A HARVESTING MACHINE FOR HARVESTING ELONGATED PLANTS AS WELL AS A METHOD FOR HARVESTING ELONGATED PLANTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582030
WALK BEHIND GREENS MOWER HANDLE HEIGHT ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575497
AUTOMATED LOCKOUT SYSTEM FOR HEADER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564118
DRAFT LINK FOR A THREE-POINT HITCH
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
63%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+31.5%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 163 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