Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/616,820

SEARCHLIGHT SYSTEM FOR VEHICLE POST

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 26, 2024
Examiner
SMITH, NKEISHA
Art Unit
3632
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Golight Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
991 granted / 1365 resolved
+20.6% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1402
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
34.0%
-6.0% vs TC avg
§102
33.5%
-6.5% vs TC avg
§112
31.2%
-8.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1365 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 . The following correspondence is a non-final Office Action for application no. 18/616,820 for a SEARCHLIGHT SYSTEM FOR VEHICLE POST, filed on 3/26/2024. Claims 21-42 are pending. 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 21-42 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. Claim 21 contains the limitation wherein the “adapter comprises a first projection and a second projection, … wherein at least a portion of the first projection has a cross-sectional geometry which widens as the first projection extends away from the adapter.” This limitation, however, is confusing because the first projection is a part of the adapter so how can the first projection extend away from the adapter (itself)? The Examiner suggests that the applicant clarify the claim to refer to a specific member of the adapter when describing which portion of the adapter the first projection extends away from. Appropriate clarification is requested. Claims 22-42 are rejected for the same reasons as dependent on claim 21. 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. Claim(s) 21 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ruckwied (U.S. Pub. 2003/0174508). Regarding claim 21, as best understood, Ruckwied teaches a searchlight mounting system for a vehicle, comprising: a mounting assembly including a bracket and an adapter configured to attach a searchlight assembly thereon, wherein the bracket has an interior surface (6) configured to face toward the vehicle (see [0030], which states that the interior surface fasces the vehicle because “[t]he inner frame 6 is provided for firmly receiving not shown parts of the vehicle, such as for example a light source and a reflector and/or a projecting optical system (so-called light module). These parts are moved together with movement of the inner frame.”) and an exterior surface opposite the interior surface, and the adapter projects out from the exterior surface of the bracket, wherein the adapter comprises a first projection (see below) and a second projection (shown in Fig. 1), which are arranged opposite the bracket and spaced apart from one another, wherein at least a portion of the first projection has a cross-sectional geometry which widens as the first projection extends away from the adapter. [AltContent: textbox (2nd projection)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (adapter)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (bracket)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Widening cross sectional geometry)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Exterior surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Interior surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (1st projection )] PNG media_image1.png 532 642 media_image1.png Greyscale [AltContent: textbox (Direction of away from the adapter (horizontal))] Regarding claim 31, as best understood, Ruckwied teaches the system of claim 21, wherein the bracket has a multi-piece construction. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 27 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruckwied (U.S. Pub. 2003/0174508). Regarding claims 27 and 28, Ruckwied teaches the system of claim 21, but does not specifically teach that the bracket and the adapter are formed together as a single component or that the adapter is a separate component fixed to the bracket. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to construct the bracket and the adapter formed together as a single component, since forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to construct the adapter as a separate component fixed to the bracket because constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 22-26, 29, 30 and 32-42 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. USP 8113701, 11148610 (vehicular lamps). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NKEISHA J. SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-5781. The examiner can normally be reached Normal hours: M/Th 7-4; T 9-5; W 7-3; F 7-4. 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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. /NKEISHA SMITH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632 January 22, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 26, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 31, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590671
Combined tripod
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590673
UTILITY CLAMPING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12570184
END CAP FOR A RAIL AND LONGITUDINAL ADJUSTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570222
COVER ASSEMBLIES FOR SEAT RAIL AT VEHICLE FLOOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565946
Pipe Support Member
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
73%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+17.0%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1365 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