Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/592,884

CONVEYANCE SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Mar 01, 2024
Examiner
PATEL, JAIMIN GHANSHYAM
Art Unit
3652
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 0% of cases
0%
Career Allow Rate
0 granted / 0 resolved
-52.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
18
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
53.2%
+13.2% vs TC avg
§102
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§112
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 0 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 § 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ota et al. (US 20220267091 A1). Regarding claim 1, Ota et al. discloses a conveyance system (Fig. 1) comprising: a mounting base (121) with a groove (1211) guided along a guide rail (115) extending in a vertical direction (It can be seen in Fig. 1); and a lifting mechanism (123) configured to raise and lower the mounting base (It can be seen in Fig. 8-9), wherein when a direction of a movement of an item to be carried out from the mounting base is defined as a forward direction (It can be seen in Fig. 7-8) and a direction opposite to the forward direction is defined as a rearward direction (It can be seen in Fig. 14-15), the mounting base is raised and lowered while pressing a side surface on a rear side of the groove against the guide rail (This is a functional language). However, Ota et al. discuses all the required structure of the claim to perform the mounting base is raised and lowered while pressing a side surface on a rear side of the groove against the guide rail. (See MPEP section 2111.04 and 2114). Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zheng et al. (US 20190352092 A1). Regarding claim 1, Zheng et al. discloses a conveyance system (Fig. 1), comprising: a mounting base (121) with a groove (See annotated Fig. 1) guided along a guide rail (See annotated Fig. 1) extending in a vertical direction (It can be seen in Fig. 1); and a lifting mechanism (124, 342) configured to raise and lower the mounting base (¶0030, lines 45-47), wherein when a direction of a movement of an item to be carried out from the mounting base is defined as a forward direction (See annotated Fig. 1) and a direction opposite to the forward direction is defined as a rearward direction (See annotated Fig. 1), the mounting base is raised and lowered while pressing a side surface on a rear side of the groove against the guide rail (This is a functional language, it is noted that when 130 moves up or down groove stays in pressed condition with the rail. Also keeping the surface pressed against to riding or sliding surface is not an innovative concept too). PNG media_image1.png 866 673 media_image1.png Greyscale Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-5 is 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional cited prior arts show other conveyance system for transferring goods. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAIMIN G PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-0052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM to 5:00 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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at 517-272-7097. 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. /SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652 /JAIMIN G PATEL/Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 01, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

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
Grant Probability
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 0 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