Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/594,865

Handle Assembly

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 04, 2024
Examiner
LUGO, CARLOS
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Illinois Tool Works Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
929 granted / 1243 resolved
+22.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
1294
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
41.8%
+1.8% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
37.6%
-2.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1243 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 . This Office Action is in response to RCE filed on 2/26/26. 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) 1-3, 7-9, 15-17, 19 and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat Application Publication No 20230258029 to Phillippe et al (Phillippe) in view of US Pat Application Publication No 20130170241 to Lesueur et al (Lesueur). PNG media_image1.png 424 583 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Phillippe discloses a handle assembly for a door having a handle aperture. The handle assembly comprises a housing (16) defining an accommodating cavity (top), a receiving channel (middle) and an operating cavity (bottom) and having a housing opening, wherein the receiving channel is located at a rear side of the housing opening, the accommodating cavity and the operating cavity are respectively located at the opposite upper side and lower side of the receiving channel and interconnected to each other through the receiving channel, and the housing opening is configured to be aligned with the handle aperture of the door. A cover plate (14) has a closed position, retracted position and an open position and is configured to close the handle aperture of the door in the closed position and to open the handle aperture of the door in the open position. A transmission device (18-30) is disposed in the housing and connected to the cover plate for moving the cover plate between the closed position and the open position in response to an electronic signal. PNG media_image2.png 559 680 media_image2.png Greyscale Wherein, the accommodating cavity of the housing is configured to accommodate the cover plate when the cover plate is in the open position, and the operating cavity of the housing is configured to at least partially accommodate an operator's hand for opening the door. However, Phillipe fails to disclose that the orientation of the cover plate with respect to the housing is the same when the cover plate is in the closed position and in the retracted position. Phillipe discloses that the transmission device will move the cover plate between a closed position into a retracted position along a first dimension and to move the cover plate between the retracted position into the open position, along a second dimension different than the first dimension. However, the cover plate orientation between the closed and the retracted positions change and then is maintained until the open position (par 63, when the transmission device alone moves the cover plate, for example as shown in figs 7a-7d). PNG media_image3.png 523 1123 media_image3.png Greyscale Lesueur teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a handle assembly that comprises a cover plate (14) that covers a handle aperture (22) and a cavity (20); wherein the orientation of the cover plate is the same when the cover plate is in the closed position and in the retracted position (a position right after the cover plate is moved from fig 5 to fig 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the cover plate described by Phillippe moving from the closed position to the retracted position without changing the orientation, as taught by Lesueur, in order to prevent any unauthorized insertion of something inside the cavity. As to claim 2, Phillippe discloses that the cover plate (14) also has a retracted position, and the cover plate is arranged such that the cover plate is located in the receiving channel when the cover plate is in the retracted position. The transmission device (18-30) is configured to move the cover plate back and forth between the closed position and the retracted position, and to move the cover plate up and down between the retracted position and the open position. As to claim 3, Phillippe discloses that a back-and-forth movement of the cover plate between the closed position and the retracted position and an up-and-down movement between the retracted position and the open position are translational movements. As to claim 7, Phillippe discloses that the handle assembly further comprises an operating element, the operating element comprises a sensing device (42) configured to detect the operator's hand and to send a signal. As to claim 8, Phillippe discloses that the sensing device (42) is disposed on a side wall of the housing (16) close to the handle aperture to allow the operator's hand to access the operating cavity from the housing opening through the receiving channel so as to be detected by the sensing device. As to claim 9, Phillippe discloses that the sensing device (42) comprises a capacitive sensor (par 63). As to claim 15, Phillipe discloses that the handle system further comprises an operating element comprising a sensing device (42) configured to detect the operator's hand and to send a control signal; and a controller (56) receiving the control signal from the sensing device to control the cover plate to move from the closed position to the open position, or to control the cover plate to move from the open position to the closed position. As to claim 16, Phillipe discloses that the controller (56) controls the door to be locked or unlocked according to the control signal. As to claims 17, 19 and 20, Phillipe discloses that the control signal comprises an external control signal (from sensor 37) or an internal control signal (from sensor 42); and the sensing device (37, 42) comprises a capacitive sensor. Wherein, the capacitive sensor is configured to send the external control signal in response to a contact by the operator's hand outside the handle assembly; or send the internal control signal in response to a contact by the operator's hand inside the operating cavity of the handle assembly. As to claims 21 and 22, Lesueur teaches that the orientation of the cover plate (14) is also the same when the cover plate is in the retracted and open position (figs 5 and 6). Claim(s) 10 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat Application Publication No 20230258029 to Phillippe et al (Phillippe) in view of US Pat Application Publication No 20130170241 to Lesueur et al (Lesueur) and further in view of US Pat No 7,108,301 to Louvel. Phillippe, as modified by Lesueur, fails to disclose that the sensing device (37, 42) comprises an ultrasonic sensor. Phillippe discloses that the sensing sensor can be a capacitance sensor or other type of sensor (par 63). Louvel teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a sensing device (5) that can be an ultrasonic senor or a capacitive type of sensor (col 4 lines 30-38). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sensor described by Phillippe, as modified by Lesueur, as an ultrasonic sensor, as taught by Louvel, since it will be considered as a design consideration from the user to use any sensor while still performing or achieve the function of sensing. Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat Application Publication No 20230258029 to Phillippe et al (Phillippe) in view of US Pat Application Publication No 20130170241 to Lesueur et al (Lesueur) and further in view of US Pat No 4,634,161 to Fukasawa et al (Fukasawa). Phillippe, as modified by Lesueur, fails to disclose that a pair of side walls of the housing defining the operating cavity extend obliquely relative to each other from top to bottom, so that the operating cavity has a bottom dimension smaller than its top dimension. PNG media_image4.png 575 1151 media_image4.png Greyscale Fukasawa teaches that it is well known in the art to define the operating cavity with a pair of side walls extending obliquely relative to each other from top to bottom, so that the operating cavity has a bottom dimension smaller than its top dimension. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the operating cavity described by Phillipe, as modified by Lesueur, as one with a smaller dimension at the bottom than at the top, as taught by Fukasawa, in order to define a cavity sized so a hand of the user. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 23 is allowed. Claim 4 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. Claims 5 and 6 would also be allowed, since the claims depend on claim 4 above. Response to Arguments With respect to the objection to the abstract language, the current amendment overcomes the previous issue. With respect to the prior art rejection, the applicant argues that Phillipe, as modified by Lesueur, fails to disclose the new limitation that the transmission device will move the cover plate between a closed position into a retracted position along a first dimension and to move the cover plate between the retracted position into the open position, along a second dimension different than the first dimension. As mentioned above, Phillipe discloses that the transmission device will move the cover plate between a closed position into a retracted position along a first dimension (when the transmission device moves the cover plate from fig 7a to fig 7b) and to move the cover plate between the retracted position into the open position, along a second dimension different than the first dimension (when the transmission device moves the cover plate from fig 7b to fig 7c). Lesueur is only used to demonstrate that the orientation of the cover plate is the same when the cover plate is in the closed position and in the retracted position. As clearly shown, the orientation is the same during the movement. Therefore, since the argument is not persuasive and the examiner will not change this position, the rejection is still maintained. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS LUGO whose telephone number is (571)272-7058. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6pm. 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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571)272-7376. 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. /Carlos Lugo/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3675 March 14, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 04, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 02, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 30, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 26, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601209
FLUSH HANDLE ASSEMBLY FOR A VEHICLE DOOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598713
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR OPENING A RECEIVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595692
AUTO FLUSH DOOR HANDLE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584330
LATCH ASSEMBLY WITH REMOVABLE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578054
Double Door Retainer
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+14.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1243 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