Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/592,212

Stroller with Luggage Bay Protection

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 29, 2024
Examiner
SHELTON, IAN BRYCE
Art Unit
3613
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Carrot Carriage LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
186 granted / 240 resolved
+25.5% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
268
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
47.6%
+7.6% vs TC avg
§102
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
§112
23.4%
-16.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 240 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Claim Objections Claims 27 and 33 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 27, lines 1-2, “is configured to configured to” should say “is configured to” Claim 33, line 2, “a locked position” should say “the locked position” Appropriate correction is required. 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) 17-18 and 23-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boonen (WO 2024170996 A1) in view of Lin (US 20250214638 A1). Regarding claim 17, Boonen discloses a stroller (buggy 1, figs.1-6), comprising: a seating section (bucket 3, fig.2), suitable for holding a child (figs.1-2); a luggage bay (luggage carrier 8, figs.1 and 3), connected below said seating section (fig.1), to receive at least one piece of luggage (fig.1); at least three wheels (wheels 6 and 7, figs.1 and 3), mounted below said luggage bay (fig.1 and 3); a wheel lock (brake mechanism on rear wheels 7, figs.1 and 3, page 7 line 30 to page 8 line 6), mounted to at least one of said at least three wheels to impede movement of the stroller (brake mechanism on rear wheels 7, figs.1 and 3, page 7 line 30 to page 8 line 6). Boonen fails to disclose an actuator, for moving said wheel lock between locked and unlocked positions; and a controller configured to communicate with said actuator to unlock said wheel lock. However, Lin discloses an actuator (automatic brake mechanism with brake controller 22 and controller 21, brake gears 221 to engage with wheels 131 and 132, paragraph [0005 and 0016], fig.3), for moving said wheel lock between locked and unlocked positions (brake gears 221 to engage with wheels 131 and 132, paragraph [0005 and 0016], fig.3); and a controller (controller 21, fig.2) configured to communicate with said actuator to unlock said wheel lock (brake gears 221 to engage with wheels 131 and 132, paragraph [0005 and 0016], fig.2-3). Boonen and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of strollers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Boonen with the automatic brake mechanism and controller of Lin with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have combined prior art elements yielding predictable results of allowing the stroller to automatically lock the brakes providing a safer stroller. Regarding claim 18, Boonen in combination with Lin, Lin discloses wherein said controller receives a wireless signal from a user (portable electronic device 231, fig.2 and 5). Regarding claim 23, Boonen in combination with Lin, Boonen discloses wherein two of said at least three wheels are round wheels (wheels 6 and 7 are round wheels, fig.1). Regarding claim 24, Boonen in combination with Lin, Boonen discloses wherein said two round wheels are also configured for 360-degree swiveling (wheels 6 are swivel wheels, fig.1). Regarding claim 25, Boonen in combination with Lin, Boonen discloses further comprising an open back, configured for nesting with at least one other stroller, of a similar size shape and configuration to the stroller (Fig.4 shows a front stroller 1A and a rear stroller 1B nested). Regarding claim 26, Boonen in combination with Lin, Lin discloses further comprising: at least one lock sensor (pressure sensor 41 disposed on the seat 14, fig.2) mounted below the seating section; and at least one tracking sensor (global positioning system 24, fig.2). Regarding claim 27, Boonen in combination with Lin, Lin discloses wherein said at least one lock sensor is configured to configured to recognize when a child is not properly seated in said seating section (pressure sensor 41 senses the body weight of a baby or toddler and sends signal 411 to controller 21, if controller does not receive signal 411 it will send an alert, fig.2, paragraph [0015]). Regarding claim 28, Boonen in combination with Lin, Lin discloses wherein said lock sensor is configured to communicate with the controller to lock said wheel lock when a child is not properly seated in said seating section (pressure sensor 41 senses the body weight of a baby or toddler and sends signal 411 to controller 21, control 21 sends signal to brake controller 22 to engage or disengage brake gears 221 from wheels 131 and 132, fig.2-3, paragraph [0015-0016]). Regarding claim 29, Boonen in combination with Lin, Lin discloses wherein said at least one tracking sensor configured to monitor the location and duration of use of the stroller (global positioning system 24, fig.2). Regarding claim 30, Boonen in combination with Lin, Lin discloses wherein said tracking sensor is configured to communicate the location and duration of use of said stroller to said controller (GPS 24 communicates with controller 21, fig.2). Regarding claim 31, Boonen in combination with Lin, Lin discloses wherein said wheel lock is applied at the end of a rental period in which a user rents and uses the stroller (wheel lock can be manually actuated via the foot brake component 33 or automatically via the controller 21 and brake controller 22, figs.1-3). Regarding claim 32, Boonen in combination with Lin, Lin discloses wherein said wheel lock is also manually actuable by an adult user of the stroller (brake mechanism can be manual actuated by foot brake component 33, fig.3). Regarding claim 33, Boonen in combination with Lin, Lin discloses wherein said controller is configured to communicate with said actuator to move said wheel lock to a locked position (automatic brake mechanism with brake controller 22 and controller 21, brake gears 221 to engage with wheels 131 and 132, paragraph [0005 and 0016], fig.3). Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boonen (WO 2024170996 A1) in view of Lin (US 20250214638 A1), and in further view of Cone (US 20010013689 A1). Regarding claim 19, Boonen in combination with Lin disclose the stroller of claim 17, but fail to disclose an additional storage area. Cone discloses further comprising a personal item storage area (item 66 can be used as storage, fig.1) with a stretchable bag or compartment and an upward-facing (item 66 is an upward-facing compartment, fig.1), stretchable opening and force biasing. Boonen and Cone are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of strollers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Boonen with the compartment (66) of Cone with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have combined prior art elements yielding predictable results of allowing for more storage as well as the item 66 can be used as a seat when the carrier 12 is removed making the stroller more versatile. Regarding claim 20, Boonen in combination with Lin and Cone discloses wherein said personal item storage area includes a box located between said seating section and a protective cage (Cone, item 66 is between carrier 12 and basket 76; Boonen, protective cage is the legs 14 around luggage carrier 8, fig.3). Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boonen (WO 2024170996 A1) in view of Lin (US 20250214638 A1), and in further view of Zhong (DE 102015117186 A1). Regarding claim 21, Boonen in combination with Lin discloses the stroller of claim 17, but fail to disclose the seating section fully reclining. However, Zhong discloses wherein said seating section includes a seatback that is fully reclinable, to a horizontal orientation (backrest 13 is fully reclinable to a horizontal position as seen in figures 1-2). Boonen and Zhong are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of strollers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Boonen with the reclinable seat of Zhong with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have been a simple substitution of one known seat for another obtaining predictable results of allowing the seat to be configured in both a seat and a cradle configuration making the cart more versatile. Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boonen (WO 2024170996 A1) in view of Lin (US 20250214638 A1), and in further view of Zhao (CN 108891454 A). Regarding claim 22, Boonen in combination with Lin discloses the stroller of claim 17 and front wheels (Boonen, wheels 6, fig.1), but fails to disclose the front wheel comprises a ball wheel. Zhao discloses wherein one of said at least three wheels is a front wheel that comprises a ball wheel (wheel assembly 3 with roller 24, figs.1-2), mounted in a socket (socket inside housing 22, figs.1-3), and configured for 360-degree swiveling and unlimited rotation (figs.1-3). Boonen and Zhao are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of vehicles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Boonen with the ball wheels of Zhao with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have been a simple substitution for one set of front wheels for another obtaining predictable results of providing better maneuverability with the ball wheels. Claim(s) 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boonen (WO 2024170996 A1) in view of Lin (US 20250214638 A1), and in further view of Freese (US 5988669 A). Regarding claim 34, Boonen in combination with Lin, Lin discloses further comprising: at least one handlebar (Lin, handle 15, fig.1; Boonen, handle 5, fig.1); and an electronic interface (Lin, master control module 20, figs.1 and 4), located on or about said at least one handlebar (Lin, fig.1), but fail to disclose at least one PDA storage pocket. However, Freese discloses at least one PDA storage pocket (console tray 22 with compartment 52, figs.1 and 4-5). Boonen and Freese are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of strollers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Boonen with the storage tray of Freese with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have combined prior art elements yielding predictable results of providing quick and easily accessible storage to the user behind the stroller. Claim(s) 35 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boonen (WO 2024170996 A1) in view of Lin (US 20250214638 A1), and in further view Washington (US 20150144411 A1). Regarding claim 35, Boonen disclose a stroller system (buggy 1 and buggies 1A and 1B, figs.1-6) comprising: a plurality of strollers (buggy 1 and buggies 1A and 1B, figs.1-6) having wheels (wheels 6 and 7, figs.1 and 3); a plurality of wheel locks (brake mechanism on rear wheels 7, figs.1 and 3, page 7 line 30 to page 8 line 6), one each on at least one wheel of each said plurality of strollers (brake mechanism on rear wheels 7, figs.1 and 3, page 7 line 30 to page 8 line 6). Boonen fails to disclose an actuator to lock and unlock brake mechanism, a controller, and an app. However, Lin discloses an actuator (automatic brake mechanism with brake controller 22 and controller 21, brake gears 221 to engage with wheels 131 and 132, paragraph [0005 and 0016], fig.3), for moving said wheel lock between locked and unlocked positions (brake gears 221 to engage with wheels 131 and 132, paragraph [0005 and 0016], fig.3); and a controller (controller 21, fig.2) configured to communicate with said actuator to unlock said wheel lock (brake gears 221 to engage with wheels 131 and 132, paragraph [0005 and 0016], fig.2-3); and app compatible to connect to any of said plurality of strollers to communicate with said plurality of controllers (portable electronic device 231 communicates with controller 21 and power control module 30, figs.2 and 5). Lin fails to disclose the app to control movement of said plurality of strollers. However, Washington discloses a remote-control device to control movement of a stroller (remote control unit 71 controls operation of the stroller, figs.1-3) Boonen and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of strollers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Boonen with the automatic brake mechanism and controller of Lin with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have combined prior art elements yielding predictable results of allowing the stroller to automatically lock the brakes providing a safer stroller. Lin and Washington are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of strollers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin with the device capable of controlling movement of Washington with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have combined prior art elements yielding predictable results of allowing the user to remotely control the stroller. Regarding claim 37, Boonen in combination with Lin and Washington discloses wherein said plurality of controllers are configured to: communicate with said plurality of actuators to move said plurality of wheel locks of at least one wheel of at least one stroller between locked and unlocked positions (automatic brake mechanism with brake controller 22 and controller 21, brake gears 221 to engage with wheels 131 and 132, paragraph [0005 and 0016], fig.3); accept locking and unlocking data and other information from said app to authorize the use of said at least one stroller (portable electronic device 231 communicates with controller 21 and controller 21 controls the engagement and disengagement of the brake gears 221 with wheels 131 and 132, figs.2-3, paragraphs [0015-0016]); and communicate location information and status data from at least one stroller to said app (Lin, global positioning system 24, fig.2, paragraph [0014]). Claim(s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boonen (WO 2024170996 A1) in view of Lin (US 20250214638 A1), Washington (US 20150144411 A1), and in further view of De Bonet (US 20200275059 A1). Regarding claim 36, Boonen in combination with Lin and Washington discloses wherein the app is configured to: communicate with the controller mounted to the stroller to determine the location of at least one stroller (Lin, global positioning system 24, fig.2); provide the location of at least one stroller to a user (Lin, paragraph [0014]); and communicate information related to the rental and use of at least one stroller to said controller (Lin, global positioning system 24, fig.2). De Bonet discloses accept payment information from a user (servers 120 store payment information and user data 552, paragraphs [0023, 0036, 0077], fig.1); provide airport information to a user (materials handling facility 102 information with inventory location 112, cart corral 116, entry location 114, fig.1). Lin and De Bonet are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of carts. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lin with the servers and stored information in the servers of De Bonet with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have combined prior art elements yielding predictable results of a better user experience in knowing where places are as well as a quicker checkout process. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art not relied upon but considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure is included in the 892 form. The art included has features related to claim limitations, the general structural of the invention, teachings, and other analogous art to the invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IAN BRYCE SHELTON whose telephone number is (571)272-6501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00. 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, Allen Shriver can be reached at (303)-297-4337. 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. /IAN BRYCE SHELTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 29, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 30, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600396
BABY CARRIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589791
HANDRAIL MECHANISM AND BABY CARRIAGE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583528
MOVING OBJECT CABIN AND MOVING OBJECT INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583497
SINGLE-OPERATOR MULTI-FUNCTION FOLDABLE TRANSPORTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576912
VEHICLE CHASSIS AND VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
78%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+15.3%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 240 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