Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/596,241

SHROUD RETENTION SYSTEM FOR A WORK TOOL

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Mar 05, 2024
Priority
Nov 06, 2018 — continuation of 10/883,257 +1 more
Examiner
MAYO, TARA LEIGH
Art Unit
3671
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Caterpillar Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allowance Rate
971 granted / 1297 resolved
+22.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
1334
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
63.2%
+23.2% vs TC avg
§102
16.4%
-23.6% vs TC avg
§112
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1297 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 24-43 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,952,751 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented shroud retention system requires the structural features of Applicant’s claimed retainer. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TARA MAYO whose telephone number is (571)272-6992. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM EST. 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, Joseph Rocca can be reached at 571-272-8971. 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. /TARA MAYO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 /tm/ 10 January 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 05, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT
Apr 16, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12637840
WORK MACHINE SURROUNDINGS MONITORING SYSTEM, WORK MACHINE, AND WORK MACHINE SURROUNDINGS MONITORING METHOD
2y 11m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12636690
HANDHELD SOIL FIXED-POINT DISINFECTION DEVICE FOR CROP GROWTH PERIOD
2y 6m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12628726
SPACING ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM OF THE DEPTH GAUGE WHEELS ASSEMBLY, PLANTING ROW UNIT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT
3y 11m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12622341
AGRICULTURAL SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING A POSITION OF A GAUGE WHEEL OF A ROW UNIT FOR A SEED-PLANTING IMPLEMENT
4y 0m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12624525
Construction Machine
2y 12m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+11.4%)
2y 7m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1297 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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