Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/615,522

HINGE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 25, 2024
Examiner
MORGAN, EMILY M
Art Unit
3677
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Fositek Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
35%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
69%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 35% of cases
35%
Career Allow Rate
354 granted / 999 resolved
-16.6% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
1054
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
43.4%
+3.4% vs TC avg
§102
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
§112
33.7%
-6.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 999 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s): “resilient members that are connected between said main supporting plate 31 and said auxiliary supporting plate 32” of claim 1 is not shown in figure 6. The figures 2, 7, and 9, do not assist in understanding this phrase. Figure 6 shows the plates 31 and 32 directly abutting at protrusion 321. Please see 112a and 112b rejection below. No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claim 1, resilient members 33 are shown in figures 2, 7, 9. Applicant claims the resilient member is “between said main supporting plate 31 and said auxiliary supporting plate 32”. Examiner notes that this is not the case in either figures 2 or 9, and the supporting plates 31 and 32 are shown as directly abutting and engaging in figure 6. The record is not clear where the “resilient members 33” are, or how they are involved with the hinge at all. Examiner assumes that resilient member 33 is merely a layer between the flat surface of figure 6 and the flexible screen 600 (unclaimed) in figure 6. Figure 7 indicates that the resilient member 33 is merely attached to the underside of the main supporting plate 31. The record is not clear where else this “resilient member” is located. Dependent claims inherit the same issues from parent claims and do not resolve any description issues. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claim 1: -the scope of “fixing seat” is not clear. Applicant claims that the fixing seat (disclosed as part 1 in figure 5) has “two lengthwise side parts”, which are disclosed as part 111, and are not shown in figure 5. Part 111 is disclosed as part of the fixing frame 11, and shown in figure 3 as part of the fixing frame 11. Therefore, the record is not clear of the scope of “fixing seat”. The record is not clear if “fixing seat” is that shown in figure 4, or if it is the entire assembly shown along axis C in figure 3. Examiner notes that removing the “lengthwise side parts” would remedy this issue. -resilient members 33 are shown in figures 9 and 2. Applicant claims the resilient member is “between said main supporting plate 31 and said auxiliary supporting plate 32”. Examiner notes that this is not the case in either figures 2 or 9, and the supporting plates 31 and 32 are shown as directly abutting and engaging in figure 6. The record is not clear where the “resilient members 33” are, or how they are involved with the hinge at all. Examiner assumes that resilient member 33 is merely a layer between the flat surface of figure 6 and the flexible screen 600 (unclaimed) in figure 6. The record is not clear where else this “resilient member” is located. Applicant’s [0028] states “main supporting plate 31 and the auxiliary supporting plate 32 are driven by the resilient force of the resilient members 33 to unfold, so that the main supporting plate 31 and 32 are co-planar”. For this reason, the figure 6 shows the plates 31 and 32 in a coplanar condition, and therefore should resilient member 33 biasing those plates to the coplanar condition. Similarly, figure 8 shows plates 31 and 32 in a non-planar condition, and therefore resilient member 33 should be shown biasing those plates away from that position. Dependent claims inherit the same issues from parent claims and do not resolve any indefinite issues. 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) 1-4, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over 2022/0303371 Liao. Regarding claim 1, the “resilient member” and the “fixing seat” is treated as best understood, as discussed in the 112a/112b rejections above. For this reason, examiner considers claim 1 under 102/103, as the assumption made above may or may not be correct. Regarding claim 1, Liao discloses a hinge adapted to be connected to two housing bodies (2000 and 3000, with flexible display 4000, best shown in figure 6a), said hinge comprising: a fixing seat (assumed to be part 10, see 112b above) that has two lengthwise side parts (edges) having a central axis disposed therebetween (lengthwise, folding as shown in figure 10), and two first slots 101 (figure 13a) respectively disposed at opposite sides of the central axis, each of said first slots 101 being curved (figure 13a); two rotating units (unit contains three parts, figure 11) that are respectively disposed at the opposite sides of the central axis (as shown in figure 11), that are connected to said fixing seat 10, and that respectively engage said first slots 101 (with curved part 32), each of said rotating units including a linkage member 32 (figure 11) that has a main body having a load surface 62 (figure 13a), a first curved rail 321 connected to said main body and slidably engaging the respective one of said first slots 101 (figure 13a and 13c), and a second curved rail 322 connected to said main body and extending away from said main body, and a rail slider 20 (figure 11) that is adapted to be connected to a respective one of the housing bodies (with holes, called “housing mounting bracket 20”), and that has a slider body (figure 12) having a supporting surface that is adapted to be connected to the respective one of the housing bodies (with holes), a second slot (shown in figure 13c) formed in said slider body 30, having a curved shape (shown in figure 13c), and slidably engaged with said second curved rail 322 (pivoting around pin 34, the exterior abuts a curved surface is the rail slider in figure 13c), and an inclined sliding portion 221 (figure 12) formed on said slider body 20, and a rotating arm 33 that is pivotably mounted to said fixing seat 10, and that has an arm body (figure 11), and an inclined guiding portion (“sliding rails on the first driven arm 33”, [0239]) formed on said arm body 33, said inclined sliding portion 221 of said rail slider and said inclined guiding portion of said rotating arm (“Sliding rails”) slidably engaging each other ([0239] “first guide spaces 221…may be configured to guide a sliding direction of the first sliding rail on the first driven arm 33”); and two supporting plate units (figure 20a) that are disposed respectively on said rotating units (as shown in figures 20a/20b), each of said supporting plate units having a main supporting plate 40 that is mounted co-movably to said load surface of said linkage member (figures 20a and 2b) of the respective one of said rotating units, and that has opposite first and second ends being respectively proximate to and distal from said fixing seat 10, an auxiliary supporting plate 100 that is pivotably mounted to said main supporting plate 40 (via the structure of the hinge), and a plurality of resilient members 81 (figures 20a/20b) that are connected between said main supporting plate 40 and said auxiliary supporting plate 10 (Please see 112a/112b rejections above; Liao discloses spring 81 is connected to plates 20 and 40 [0286] the elastic member 81 being “stretched” when the housing members are closed, and therefore biases the plates 100 and 40 to be coplanar as shown in figures 24 and 13c); wherein said rotating units are movable between an opened state (figures 2, 13c, 20a) and a closed state (figures 4, 16-18); wherein, when said rotating units are in the opened state, said supporting plate units cooperatively cover said fixing seat 10 (figures 24 and 13c), and a distance between said auxiliary supporting plates 100 of said supporting plate units is smaller than a distance between said main supporting plates of said supporting plate units (because the auxiliary supporting plates are unitary); and wherein, when said rotating units are in the closed state (figures 8, 16-18), said supporting plate units face each other 40 (figure 18), a distance between said main supporting plates of said supporting plate units decreases from said first ends of said main supporting plates of said supporting plate units to said second ends of said main supporting plates of said supporting plate units (figure 18), said auxiliary supporting plate 100 of each of said supporting plate units is pivoted to an angle relative to said main supporting plate 40 of said supporting plate unit, and abuts against said fixing seat, and said supporting surfaces of said rail sliders are parallel to each other (figure 18). Regarding claim 2, Liao discloses the hinge as claimed in claim 1, wherein: said main supporting plate 40 of each of said supporting plate units has a plate body portion (figures 15a/15b), and a plurality of pivoting joint portions (opposite protrusion 43 in figure 15a) extending from said plate body portion towards the central axis (42 and 43 are away from central axis, shown in figure 16, so the protrusions opposite 43 are toward the central axis); and said auxiliary supporting plate 100 of each of said supporting plate units has a plurality of pivoting blocks pivotably and respectively mounted to said pivoting joint portions of said supporting plate unit (as shown in figure 25a/25b). Regarding claim 3, Liao discloses the hinge as claimed in claim 2, wherein, for each of said supporting plate units, each of said pivoting joint portions (on plate 40 opposite protrusion 43) of said main supporting plate defines a pivoting joint groove (groove between the protrusions opposite 43), and each of said pivoting blocks of said auxiliary supporting plate is pivotably disposed in said pivoting joint groove of the respective one of said pivoting joint portions of said main supporting plate (in an alternating manner, shown in figure 7). Regarding claim 4, Liao discloses the hinge as claimed in claim 2, wherein, for each of said supporting plate units, said main supporting plate further has two protruding portions extending from said plate body portion and respectively supporting opposite ends of said auxiliary supporting plate. Regarding claim 6, Liao discloses the hinge as claimed in claim 1, wherein: said rotating arm 33 of each of said rotating units further has a gear portion 333 formed on said arm body; and said hinge further comprises a synchronizing mechanism 400 interconnecting said rotating arms of said rotating units and including a plurality of gears (claim 14) that mesh with said gear portions of said rotating arms of said rotating units (best shown in figures 25a/25b). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see 892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILY M MORGAN whose telephone number is (303)297-4260. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8-5 MST. 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, Jason San can be reached at (571)272-6531. 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. /EMILY M MORGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 25, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12577821
DOOR OPERATOR ARMATURE CONNECTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12560012
VEHICLE HOOD HINGE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12545051
SWIVEL WHEEL LOCKING SYSTEM AND METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12520916
SHALLOW DEPTH CUT DIAMONDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12521900
HANDLE FOR A PERSONAL CARE IMPLEMENT AND PERSONAL CARE IMPLEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 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
35%
Grant Probability
69%
With Interview (+33.5%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 999 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