Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/582,366

INTEGRATED SEAT AND STORAGE ATTACHMENT FOR A SCOOTER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 20, 2024
Examiner
GABLER, PHILIP F
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Neutron Holdings Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
900 granted / 1228 resolved
+21.3% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
53 currently pending
Career history
1281
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
40.2%
+0.2% vs TC avg
§102
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
§112
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1228 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Invention II and species Group VII in the reply filed on 22 January 2026 and during the interview held on 6 February 2026 is acknowledged. Drawings The drawings are objected to because the greyscale renderings make details difficult to discern; proper black-and-white line drawings should be submitted. 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 Objections Claims 11, 12, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation of “one or more safety equipment” is grammatically awkward; perhaps “piece” of safety equipment would be more clear. Appropriate correction is required. 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) 9-12 and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cutri et al. (US Patent Application Publication Number 2021/0300495). Regarding claim 9, Cutri discloses a scooter comprising: a main body including a seat assembly that includes a support member (at least of a main body and/or the “supporting structure” of paragraph 16), a seat frame portion (including 30), and a seat cushion portion (of 4); and a storage component (10), wherein the storage component is configured to be attached to the support member or the seat frame portion (it is attached to both and at least directly attached to the seat frame portion). Regarding claim 10, Cutri further discloses the storage component is configured to be removable from the main body (10 is releasably fixed to 30 via 40). Regarding claims 11 and 12, Cutri further discloses the storage component is configured to receive one or more safety equipment, wherein the one or more safety equipment is a helmet (a helmet is disclosed as storable in the box; see at least paragraph 32). Regarding claim 14, Cutri further discloses the storage component includes a retention portion configured to retain the one or more safety equipment (cover 12 for instance would serve to retain the safety equipment). Regarding claims 15 and 16, Cutri further discloses the seat frame portion includes a protruding portion (including 31-33) such that the storage component is configured to be attached to the protruding portion of the seat frame portion, wherein the storage component includes a mounting portion (at least 41A) such that the protruding portion of the seat frame portion mechanically couples to the mounting portion (this is the general arrangement). Regarding claim 17, Cutri further discloses the storage component and the seat frame portion form a water-resistant container when the storage component is in a closed position (this is the general arrangement; i.e. the seat frame and storage component, with cover closed, would be water-resistant at least based on shape). Regarding claim 18, Cutri further discloses the storage component is accessible for insertion of objects when the storage component is in an open position (i.e. by opening cover 12, objects could be inserted). 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. Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cutri in view of Liu (WO 2021/169629; copy and machine translation attached). Cutri discloses a device as explained above including a lock (at least at 51) configured to be locked or unlocked but does not disclose instruction via a mobile network. Liu discloses a related device including locking configured to be locked or unlocked in response to an instruction received via a mobile network (see at least the paragraph beginning “FIG. 2 is an overall…” on page 9 of the translation). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide instruction via mobile network as taught by Liu in Cutri’s device because this could increase user convenience and security. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because it shows a range of related devices. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP F GABLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2155. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 - 4:30. 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 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. /PHILIP F GABLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 20, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Feb 06, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 07, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 14, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 14, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600270
CARRYCOT TO BE DETACHABLY MOUNTED ON A BASE BEING DISMOUNTABLY ATTACHED IN A VEHICLE OR ON A STROLLER FRAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600272
CHILD RESTRAINT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589678
CHILD SAFETY SEAT AND RELATED TETHER ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12559001
SHOULDER STRAP WIDTH ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM AND CHILD SAFETY SEAT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12559003
CHILD SAFETY SEAT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
73%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+23.7%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1228 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