Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/581,312

RECLINING MECHANISM FOR A FOLDING CHAIR

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Feb 19, 2024
Examiner
KWIECINSKI, RYAN D
Art Unit
3635
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Denovo Brands LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
772 granted / 1133 resolved
+16.1% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
1183
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
39.7%
-0.3% vs TC avg
§102
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§112
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1133 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 13 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 13 recites the limitations "the support wall" and “the second opening” in lines 1 and 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. Claim(s) 1-3, 7-10, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2014-46160 (2014046160) to Kamei. Regarding claim 1, Kamei discloses a folding chair having a back (110) rotatably connected to a seat (120) comprising: a frame having a seat portion (121) and a back portion (111), the back portion rotatable (at P2) relative to the seat portion; a first reclining mechanism (Fig.9A; located in one of the armrests 140) attached to a first side of the seat portion and a first side of the back portion; a second first reclining mechanism (Fig.9A; located in the other of the armrests 140) attached to a second side of the seat portion and a second side of the back portion; each of the first reclining mechanism and second reclining mechanism further comprising: a first cover (140) extending from a front end to a rear end, the rear end configured to be attached to the back portion of the folding chair (attached at P2, Fig.9A); a tension spring (144) attached to the rear end of the first cover (@ P2); and a support member (P1) attached to a portion of the frame and the tension spring (Fig.9B), wherein the first cover moves along a portion of the support member between a first position and a second position (Fig.9A; solid and dotted lines). Regarding claim 2, each of the first reclining mechanism and second reclining mechanism further comprising: a stop wall (at 141W, Fig.9B) attached to an inside of the first cover; and a mechanical stop (P1t) fixed to the support member, the engagement of the stop wall with the mechanical stop limits movement of the first cover and the back portion of the chair (Fig.9B). Regarding claim 3, wherein the first position is an upright position (Fig.3) and the second position is a reclining position (Y3, Fig.3). Regarding claim 7, wherein the folding chair is a beach chair (Fig.3). Regarding claim 8, Kamei discloses a reclining mechanism for a folding chair, the folding chair having a frame (111, 121), the reclining mechanism comprising: a first cover (140) extending from a front end to a rear end, the rear end configured to be attached to a back portion of the folding chair (attached at P2); a tension spring (144) attached to the rear end of the first cover (@ P2); and a support member (P1) attached to a portion of the frame and the tension spring (Fig.9B), wherein the first cover moves along a portion of the support member between a first position and a second position (Fig.9A). Regarding claim 9, further comprising: a stop wall (at 141W, Fig.9B) attached to an inside of the first cover; and a mechanical stop (P1t) fixed to the support member, the engagement of the stop wall with the mechanical stop limits movement of the first cover and the back portion of the chair (Fig.9B). Regarding claim 10, wherein the first position is an upright position (Fig.3) and the second position is a reclining position (Y3, Fig.3). Regarding claim 14, two of the reclining mechanisms are attached to a folding chair (located in each arm rest), wherein the folding chair is one of a beach chair (Fig.3). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 15-18 are allowed. Claims 4-6, 11, and 12 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to disclose reclining mechanisms having all of the claimed components in combination as well as a second cover extending from the rear of the first cover forward to seal the mechanism within. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D KWIECINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday from 8:30 am to 4:00 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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 272-3238. 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. RDK /RYAN D KWIECINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 19, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599788
Rope Grab
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601182
DECORATIVE QUOIN INSTALLATION AND ILLUMINATION SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600278
VEHICLE SEAT FLOOR FILLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594861
ADJUSTMENT DEVICE AND VEHICLE SEAT WITH ADJUSTMENT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589045
WALL MOUNT FOR MOUNTING A MEDICAL DEVICE
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
68%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+19.6%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1133 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