Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/606,451

Collapsible Mobile Desk

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Mar 15, 2024
Examiner
AYRES, TIMOTHY MICHAEL
Art Unit
3637
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allow Rate
570 granted / 970 resolved
+6.8% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
1012
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
45.2%
+5.2% vs TC avg
§102
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
§112
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 970 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status This is a first office action on the merits of application SN 18/606,451 and 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 1-9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,957,241 in view of US Patent 6,823,804 to Arnell and US Patent 10,426,259 to Patton. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are both directed to a mobile desk with a seat and desk. The Patent does not expressly claim snap-in table replacement and a connecting bracket for attachment to a second desk. Arnell teaches a interchange table top (19,20) that snaps into a base plate via fasteners. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the desk described in the claims of Patent 11,957,241 by using an interchangeable table top as taught by Arnell to allow designs to be changed. Patton teaches connecting brackets (36) to connect between tables (10, Col 4, line 61-Col 5, line 31). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the desk described in the claims of Patent 11,957,241 by adding a connecting bracket as taught by Patton to connect multiple desks together. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the double patent rejection(s) or a terminal disclaimer is filed. Claim 2-9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the double patent rejection(s) or a terminal disclaimer is filed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY MICHAEL AYRES whose telephone number is (571)272-8299. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11:30-8. 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, Dan Troy can be reached at (571) 270-3742. 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. /TIMOTHY M AYRES/ Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 15, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593914
Storage Components for a Configurable Storage System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588754
KEYBOARD TRAY WITH SWINGING HEIGHT ADJUSTMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582899
BOARD-CARRYING SUPPORT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575667
TABLETOP BUMPER KIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575674
SLIDE RAIL ASSEMBLY
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
59%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+22.3%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 970 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