Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/597,594

PRESSING BLOCK OF VEGETABLE CUTTER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 06, 2024
Examiner
MATTHEWS, JENNIFER S
Art Unit
3724
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Zhejiang Fullstar Houseware Co.,Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allow Rate
437 granted / 817 resolved
-16.5% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
56 currently pending
Career history
873
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
46.8%
+6.8% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 817 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 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. Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent No. 9,174,352 to Repac. In re claim 1, Repac teaches a pressing block of a vegetable cutter, comprising a pressing block base (3) and a plurality of pressing teeth (4) disposed at a bottom of the pressing block base, wherein the pressing block base is provided with a plurality of guiding through-holes (46) along a direction of the pressing teeth, a driving rod (42) penetrating through the pressing block base (3) is slidably disposed in the guiding through-hole (46), the driving rod has one end connected to a pump cleaning grid (23) and the other end connected to a driving block (41), the pump cleaning grid is provided with a plurality of mesh holes (as shown in at least Figure 9) fitting with the pressing teeth (as shown in at least Figure 8), the pump cleaning grid slidably sleeves the pressing teeth via the mesh holes, and a reset cleaning spring (40) is disposed between the driving block (41) and the pressing block base. In re claim 6, wherein the pressing block base (3) is (capable of being) detachably connected to a pressing cover of the vegetable cutter (see Figure 5). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claims 1, 2, and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 20050229405 to Endres et al. in view of Repac. In re claim 1, Endres teaches a pressing block of a vegetable cutter, comprising a pressing block base (12) and a plurality of pressing teeth (14) disposed at a bottom of the pressing block base, wherein the pressing block base is provided with a guiding through-hole (60) along a direction of the pressing teeth, a driving rod (56) penetrating through the pressing block base (12) is slidably disposed in the guiding through-hole (60), the driving rod has one end connected to a pump cleaning grid (46) and the other end connected to a driving block (52), the pump cleaning grid is provided with a plurality of mesh holes (as shown in at least Figure 6) fitting with the pressing teeth (as shown in at least Figure 6), the pump cleaning grid slidably sleeves the pressing teeth via the mesh holes, and a reset cleaning spring (62) is disposed between the driving block (52) and the pressing block base (12). In re claim 2, wherein a plurality of guiding plates (32) are disposed in the pressing block base, and the driving block (52) is slidably disposed on the guiding plates along the direction of the pressing teeth. Note the drive block has dimensions in both a horizontal and vertical direction which are along the direction of the pressing teeth. In re claim 4, wherein a bottom of the driving block (52) is provided with a spring mounting base (as shown in at least Figures 4 and 5, see Annotated Figure 1), a spring mounting groove (30) is disposed at a position of the pressing block base with respect to the spring mounting base, and the reset cleaning spring (62) has one end sleeving the spring mounting base and the other end accommodated in the spring mounting groove. In re claim 5, wherein the driving rod (56) and the pump cleaning grid (46) are integrated, and the driving rod (56) is securely connected to the driving block (52) via a fastening bolt (Para 0021). In re claim 6, wherein the pressing block base (12) is (capable of being) detachably connected to a pressing cover of the vegetable cutter (see Figure 5). Regarding claim 1, Endres teaches the pressing block base having a guiding through hole and does not teach a plurality of guiding through holes. Repac teaches a pressing block (43) having a plurality of guiding through holes (46) which drive rods (42) penetrate to aid in driving the cleaning grid. The drive rods are permanently attached to the cleaning gride to prevent the rods from falling off (Col. 11, lines 35-53). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Endres with a plurality of guiding through holes and driving rods as taught by Repac which to provide a plurality of through holes to correspond to a plurality of drive rods to establish a permanent connection between the drive rods and the pressing block to prevent the drive rods from falling off (Col. 11, lines 35-53). Proving Endres with a plurality of through holes and corresponding drive rods is an obvious design choice. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that providing Endres with more than one drive rod would not alter the functionality of the pressing block. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 20050229405 to Endres et al. in view of Repac, as applied to the above claims, and in further view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20140259683 to Zaretsky. In re claim 3, modified Endres teaches wherein an end portion on an inner side of at least one of the guiding plates is provided with a guiding pillar (32 is a pillar), but does not teach the driving block is provided with a first opening groove fitting with the guiding pillar, and the driving block is further provided with a second opening groove fitting with another guiding plate. Zaretsky teaches in the art of pressing blocks, a driving block is provided with at two tabs (47,49) which engage slot (25) of the inner wall in order to retain the driving blocks in the cell. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide modified Endres with the guide plate and driving block arrangement with a tab and slot arrangement as taught by Zaretsky to retain the drive block within the pressing block base (Para 0038). Zeretsky teaches the drive block having a tab which is received in a slot; however, the one having ordinary skill in the art would have possessed the knowledge and recognized the drive block could have a slot to receive a tab of the guide pillar, which is merely a reversal of working essential parts. In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955). Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Repac (hereinafter Repac ‘352) in view of US Patent No. 7,882,641 to Repac (hereinafter Repac ‘641) or EP 2002772 to Schleinzer. In re claim 7, Repac ‘352 teaches, the pressing block base (12), but does not teach the pressing block base is provided with a plurality of limiting blocks on a side and a slot on the other side, the limiting block fits with a limiting groove on the pressing cover, and the slot is detachably connected to a clamped head on the pressing cover (claim 7) and wherein the pressing block base is provided with a plurality of limiting blocks on a side and a slot on the other side, the limiting block fits with a limiting groove on the pressing cover, the pressing cover is provided with a clamped-head mounting base, a clamped head snap-fitted with the slot is slidably disposed on the clamped-head mounting base, a reset locking spring is disposed between the clamped head and the clamped-head mounting base, and the clamped head is switched between an unlocking position and a locking position (claim 8). Repac teaches a block (24) with a plurality of limiting blocks (21) on a side and a slot (as shown in at least Figure 1) on the other side (see Annotated Figure 1, below), the limiting block (is capable of fitting) fits with a limiting groove (24) on the cover, and the slot is (capable of being) detachably connected to a clamped head (16) on the pressing cover and wherein the block base is provided with a plurality of limiting blocks (21) on a side and a slot (see Annotated Figure 1, below) on the other side, the limiting block (21) (is capable of fitting) fits with a limiting groove (24) on the pressing cover, the pressing cover is (capable of being) provided with a clamped-head mounting base, a clamped head snap-fitted with the slot is slidably disposed on the clamped-head mounting base, a reset locking spring is disposed between the clamped head and the clamped-head mounting base, and the clamped head is switched between an unlocking position and a locking position (claim 8). Repac ‘641 teaches a block (24) with a plurality of limiting blocks (21) on a side and a slot (as shown in at least Figure 1) on the other side (see Annotated Figure 1, below), the limiting block (is capable of fitting) fits with a limiting groove (24) on the cover, and the slot is (capable of being) detachably connected to a clamped head (16) on the pressing cover and wherein the block base is provided with a plurality of limiting blocks (21) on a side and a slot (see Annotated Figure 1, below) on the other side, the limiting block (21) (is capable of fitting) fits with a limiting groove (24) on the pressing cover, the pressing cover is (capable of being) provided with a clamped-head mounting base, a clamped head snap-fitted with the slot is slidably disposed on the clamped-head mounting base, a reset locking spring is disposed between the clamped head and the clamped-head mounting base, and the clamped head is switched between an unlocking position and a locking position (claim 8). PNG media_image1.png 464 638 media_image1.png Greyscale Schleinzer teaches a block (20) with a plurality of limiting blocks (29a, 29b) on a side and a slot (26a, 26b) on the other side, the limiting block (is capable of fitting) fits with a limiting groove, and the slot is (capable of being) detachably connected to a clamped head (12) on the cover and wherein the block base is provided with a plurality of limiting blocks (29a, 29b) on a side and a slot (26a, 26b) on the other side, the limiting block (29a, 29b) (is capable of fitting) fits with a limiting groove on the pressing cover, the pressing cover is (capable of being) provided with a clamped-head mounting base, a clamped head snap-fitted with the slot is slidably disposed on the clamped-head mounting base, a reset locking spring is disposed between the clamped head and the clamped-head mounting base, and the clamped head is switched between an unlocking position and a locking position (claim 8). Note, the pressing cover of the vegetable cutter has not been positively recited. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the pressing block of Repac ‘352 with a limiting block and slot arrangement as taught by Repac ‘641 or Schleinzer to prevent unwanted movement of the pushers during cutting thereby preventing misaligned cuts and damage to the pushers. The modification of Repac ‘352 in view of Repac ‘641 or Schleinzer is an obvious design choice. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. EP3620279 teaches a vegetable cutter with a clamping head that switches between a locked and unlocked position. FR3049206 teaches holding blocks extending from a block base. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER S MATTHEWS whose telephone number is (571)270-5843. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8am-4pm. 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, Adam Eiseman can be reached at 571-270-3818. 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. /JENNIFER S MATTHEWS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 06, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589514
Capsule Cutting Apparatus and Method
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589512
SHEARING TOOL WITH CLOSURE ASSIST
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12570014
CUTTING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12539636
Power Transmission Unit for Electrode Cutting Apparatuses
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12539634
PIPE CUTTING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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
54%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+20.9%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 817 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month