Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/596,912

INSULATED SLEEVE CONNECTORS AND METHODS FOR CONNECTING DUCTS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Mar 06, 2024
Examiner
DRAGICEVICH, ZACHARY T
Art Unit
3679
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
The Boeing Company
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
575 granted / 723 resolved
+27.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +5% lift
Without
With
+4.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
749
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
39.0%
-1.0% vs TC avg
§102
33.8%
-6.2% vs TC avg
§112
23.4%
-16.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 723 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
CTNF 18/596,912 CTNF 91880 DETAILED ACTION 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 07-42-04 AIA A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 22 May 2026 has been entered. Election/Restrictions 08-05 AIA Claim s 9-11, 15-17, 21, 51, 52, 78, 81, and 88 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 18 September 2025 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 4-8, 12, and 89-91 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1)/(a)(2 ) as being anticipated by Webb et al. (US 2018/0135793 hereinafter "Webb"). It is noted that a different interpretation of the prior art is being applied than previously . In regards to claim 1, Webb discloses an insulated sleeve connector comprising: a tubular body (casing, see abstract) having a longitudinal axis and comprising a base layer (106) of a flexible material forming: a first end (left end in fig. 3) comprising a first opening; a second end (right end in fig. 3)opposite the first end along the longitudinal axis and comprising a second opening; and a central section situated along the longitudinal axis between the first end and the second end and an insulating layer (128) of insulating material coupled to an outer side of a portion of the base layer forming the central section of the tubular body; a first protrusion (300) projecting from an inner surface of the tubular body adjacent to the central section; and a second protrusion (300) projecting from the inner surface of the tubular body adjacent to the central section and spaced away from the first protrusion along the longitudinal axis. In regards to claims 4 and 91, Webb further discloses the base layer of the flexible material forms: a first section (left portion in fig. 3) extending along the longitudinal axis between the first end and the central section; and a second section (right portion in fig. 3) extending along the longitudinal axis between the second end and the central section; the first section is configured to receive a first duct (fig. 3 shows this capability); the second section is configured to receive a second duct (fig. 3 shows this capability); and the central section has a length dimension along the longitudinal axis that is greater than a distance between a first duct end of the first duct and a second duct end of the second duct when the first duct is received by the first section and the second duct is received by the second section (fig. 3 shows this capability with hypothetical ducts; it is noted that the ducts are not required elements of the claim but rather recited functionally). In regards to claim 5, Webb further discloses a first groove (see groove between protrusions "300") disposed on an inner surface of the tubular body along the central section, wherein the first groove is configured to receive a first bead of the first duct (fig. 3 shows this capability); and a second groove (see other groove between protrusions "300") disposed on the inner surface of the tubular body along the central section and spaced from the first groove along the longitudinal axis, wherein the second groove is configured to receive a second bead of the second duct (fig. 3 shows this capability). In regards to claim 6, Webb further discloses the first groove has a first groove width that is larger than a first bead width of the first bead (fig. 3 shows this capability with hypothetical ducts; it is noted that the ducts are not required elements of the claim but rather recited functionally); and the second groove has a second groove width that is larger than a second bead width of the second bead (fig. 3 shows this capability with hypothetical ducts; it is noted that the ducts are not required elements of the claim but rather recited functionally). In regards to claim 7, Webb further discloses the insulated layer of the insulating material is further coupled to the base later forming at least one of the first section and the second section of the tubular body (shown in fig. 3). In regards to claim 8, Webb further discloses the first protrusion is located at a first junction of the first section and the central section (shown in fig. 3) and provides a first tactile response to insertion of the first duct (fig. 3 shows this capability with hypothetical ducts; it is noted that the ducts are not required elements of the claim but rather recited functionally ); and the second protrusion is located at a second junction of the second section and the central section (shown in fig. 3) that provides a second tactile response to insertion of the second duct fig. 3 shows this capability with hypothetical ducts; it is noted that the ducts are not required elements of the claim but rather recited functionally). In regards to claim 12, Webb further discloses a number of first tabs (112) extending outwardly from the first end along the longitudinal axis; and a number of second tabs (112) extending outwardly from the second end along the longitudinal axis. In regards to claim 89, Webb discloses an insulated sleeve connector comprising: a tubular body (casing, see abstract) having a longitudinal axis and comprising a base layer (106) of a flexible material, the base layer forming: a first end (left end in fig. 3) of the tubular body comprising a first opening; a second end (right end in fig. 3) of the tubular body opposite the first end along the longitudinal axis and comprising a second opening; and a central section of the tubular body situated along the longitudinal axis between the first end and the second end; and a number of first tabs (112) extending outwardly from the first end; and a number of second tabs (112) extending outwardly from the second end. In regards to claim 90, Webb further discloses the tubular body further comprises: an insulated layer (128) of an insulating material coupled to at least a portion of the base layer; a first protrusion (300) projecting from an inner surface of the tubular body adjacent to the central section; and a second protrusion (300) projecting from the inner surface of the tubular body adjacent to the central section and spaced away from the first protrusion along the longitudinal axis . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim 25 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. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. It is noted that a new interpretation of the Webb reference has been applied. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY T DRAGICEVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-0505. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 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, Matthew D. Troutman can be reached at (571) 270-3654. 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. /ZACHARY T DRAGICEVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679 06/02/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/596,912 Page 2 Art Unit: 3679 Application/Control Number: 18/596,912 Page 3 Art Unit: 3679 Application/Control Number: 18/596,912 Page 4 Art Unit: 3679 Application/Control Number: 18/596,912 Page 5 Art Unit: 3679 Application/Control Number: 18/596,912 Page 6 Art Unit: 3679 Application/Control Number: 18/596,912 Page 7 Art Unit: 3679
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 6 earlier events
Mar 20, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102
May 07, 2026
Interview Requested
May 14, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 14, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
May 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
May 22, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
May 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12703108
APPARATUS FOR FACILITATING AUTOMATED CONNECTION
1y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12698860
TESTABLE TERMINATION FITTING
2y 6m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12692960
MITIGATION OF VIBRATION IN PIPE SYSTEMS
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12692966
Device for Connecting a Water Pipe to a Component Having a Passage
2y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12680633
GROOVE-FREE QUICK-INSERT PIPE CLAMP AND PROCESSING DEVICE THEREOF
2y 2m to grant Granted Jul 14, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+4.9%)
2y 10m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 723 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