Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/616,780

POP-UP DISPLAY

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 26, 2024
Examiner
HOGE, GARY CHAPMAN
Art Unit
3631
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Menasha Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
773 granted / 1217 resolved
+11.5% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
1241
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
44.5%
+4.5% vs TC avg
§102
28.7%
-11.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1217 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 38-40 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 38, the recitation that the first and second foldable inserts are “connected to each of the plurality of panels” appears to be misdescriptive. The claim recites “parallel fold lines,” the plural indicating at least two fold lines, and therefore, at least three panels. That can only be referring to the embodiments of Figs. 19-24. In each of those embodiments, the first and second foldable inserts are connected to two of the panels, not “each” of them. Further, the phrase “a first end” and the phrase “a second end” are now repeated in the claim, making it unclear whether the second instance of “a first end” is the same as the first instance of “a first end” and whether the second instance of “a second end” is the same as the first instance of “a second end.” Claims 39 and 40 are rejected based on their dependency, respectively. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed February 11, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the rejection of claim 38 under 35 USC 112, the amendment filed February 11, 2026 does not appear to correct the problem that led to the rejection. Unfortunately, Applicant’s remarks do not explain why Applicant thinks the amendment does overcome the rejection. They merely state that Applicant “submits this rejection is now moot.” Allowable Subject Matter Claims 21-25 and 28-37 are allowed. Claims 38-40 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 21 and 38, the recitation that the locking mechanism includes a tab having a main body portion that lays flat against the insert when in the locked position (best illustrated in Figs. 6 and 7) defines over the prior art of record. Claims 22-25 and 28-37 are allowed based on their dependencies, respectively. Claims 39 and 40 would be allowable based on their dependencies, respectively. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY C HOGE whose telephone number is (571)272-6645. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday. 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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571) 272-8227. 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. /GARY C HOGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 26, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Feb 11, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597372
NOVELTY DISPLAY PLATFORM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586488
PHOTOLUMINESCENT SIGNAGE FOR LOW LIGHT AMBIENT ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586487
LIT BADGE WITH ROLL STAMP SELECTIVE CHROMING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576779
Segmented Display With Photon Recycling Cavity
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573321
ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+23.3%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1217 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