Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/571,156

HARNESSES

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Dec 15, 2023
Priority
Jun 18, 2021 — GB 2108789.5 +2 more
Examiner
HAWK, NOAH CHANDLER
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Treemagineers Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allowance Rate
967 granted / 1574 resolved
+9.4% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
58 currently pending
Career history
1630
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
42.7%
+2.7% vs TC avg
§102
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§112
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1574 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . 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 “lower bight within which a connecting piece is retained” and the “link components, each being connected to the connecting piece and to at least one of the leg loops” recited in Claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “96” has been used to designate both the “single lower bight” in Fig. 2 and an upper bight in Fig. 5. 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. 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. Claim 1 recites “one or a pair of link components, each being connected to the connecting piece and to at least one of the leg loops” which renders the claims indefinite. As explicitly defined by the applicant (see below), “link components” in the claims refer to element 52. This element is not described or depicted anywhere in the disclosure as being connected to at least one of the leg loops. Claim 1 describes “a lower bight within which a connecting piece is retained” which renders the claims indefinite. There is no depiction of a “lower bight” (element 96 of the applicant’s device) retaining a connecting piece. As the applicant asserts, the connecting piece in question is element 90 (“Figure 10 shows the connecting piece 90 and the lower bight 96” – remarks, page 5, lines 16-17). Figure 10 plainly shows that element 90 (connecting piece) is retained within “inner upper bight” 98, not, as claimed, within the lower bight. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 2-6, filed 7/5/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-18 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and the objections to the drawings have been fully considered and are partially persuasive. Therefore, the rejection and objection have been partially withdrawn. For the purposes of examination, the “flexible structural component” will be treated as exclusively referring to element 94 of the figures and the “link components” will be treated as exclusively referring to element 52 of the figures. The rejection of Claims 1-18 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is partially maintained as to paragraph 4(c) of the Non-Final office action. Even if, arguendo, the “lower bight” recited in Claim 1 is element 96, there is still no description or depiction of such element receiving or retaining a “connecting piece.” The connecting pieces identified by the applicant are elements 44 or 90. As acknowledged by the applicant, element 44 is retained in a separate part of the device. The applicant asserts that the element in question is element 90 (“Figure 10 shows the connecting piece 90 and the lower bight 96” – remarks, page 5, lines 16-17). Figure 10 plainly shows that element 90 (connecting piece) is retained within “inner upper bight” 98. As such, the rejection of Claims 1-18 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is maintained as to the indefinite nature of this phrase in the claim. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Amankwah et al., Kopp, Casebolt et al., Petzl et al., Jin, Phillips, and Helms teach harnesses. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NOAH C. HAWK whose telephone number is (571)272-1480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5:30pm. 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 Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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. NOAH C. HAWK Primary Examiner Art Unit 3636 /Noah C. Hawk/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 15, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 30, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jul 05, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 25, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12728302
ROPING HARNESS
2y 3m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12716260
FOLDABLE TENT FRAMEWORK AND TENT
3y 1m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12714247
Food Protection Device
2y 11m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12714628
WALKER DEVICE FOR GAIT TRAINING
2y 3m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12703992
SUN SHADING SYSTEMS
3y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
61%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+22.4%)
1y 11m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1574 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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