Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/620,181

RETENTION DEVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Mar 28, 2024
Examiner
DEMEREE, CHRISTOPHER R
Art Unit
3734
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Veritiv Operation Company
OA Round
2 (Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
1097 granted / 1594 resolved
-1.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
82 currently pending
Career history
1676
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
41.4%
+1.4% vs TC avg
§102
33.1%
-6.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1594 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 § 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. Claim(s) 1-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stack, Jr. (US 9932162 B2; hereinafter Stack) in view of Tanner (US 2011/0024324 A1). Regarding claims 1-6, 8-11, 13-18, and 20-24, Stack discloses a packaging article and blank for making comprising a back portion (see illustration below) foldably attached to a front portion (see illustration below); PNG media_image1.png 575 836 media_image1.png Greyscale and a mesh element (120) positioned across the front portion and adhered to at least a portion the front portion for conforming to a shape of an object positionable between the back portion and the front portion (see Col 10 lines 15-35); and at least one flap (114/116; Examiner notes that each of the front and rear portions comprise three distinct flaps foldably attached for a total of six flaps) coupled to at least one of the front portion and the back portion, wherein the at least one flap is positionable between a first position and a second position, wherein, in the second position, the at least one flap is angle relative to the at least one of the front portion and the back portion and configured to frictionally secure the retention device in an outer packaging (see Figures 62-63; and Col 9 lines 34-44), wherein the retention device is positionable in an open position in which the front portion is positioned away from the back portion (see Fig. 62), and wherein the retention device is positionable in a closed position in which the front portion is positioned adjacent to the back portion for securing the object between the back portion and the mesh element (see Fig. 63). Stack lacks disclosure of a “cutout” in the front portion or rear portion that the mesh is secured across. Tanner teaches a retention device comprising a front portion (122) comprising a cutout (120) define a frame (114) around a flexible suspension portion (i.e. mesh; 118). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s filing to modify Stack’s front portion to include a cutout in order to allow for the secure retention of an article within said cutout and mesh retention (Tanner; see Par. 0029-0031). Regarding claims 7 and 19, Stack, as modified above, discloses a retention device that includes no plastic material (Stack; Col 1 lines 15-20). Regarding claim 12, Stack, as modified above, discloses a retention device further comprising a support backing (Stack; 122) secured to the back portion of the retention device for adding structural support to the back portion. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 7-9, filed 10/07/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-5, 7-9, 13-17, and 19 under USC 102(a)(1)—in view of Gelardi have been fully considered and are persuasive. Gelardi lacks the retention device construction, as now claimed (e.g. flap coupled to at least one of the front or back portions) Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of USC 103(a)—Stack in view of Tanner. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE whose telephone number is (571)270-1982. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, 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, NATHAN J NEWHOUSE can be reached at (571)272-4544. 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. /CHRISTOPHER R DEMEREE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 28, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 02, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 07, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 20, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595093
PACKING BOX
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595091
METHOD OF COLLAPSING A COLLAPSIBLE BOX
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589908
TAKEOUT FOOD BOX WITH EXTRA FOOD POCKET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582987
CARRIER DEVICE FOR A DISPENSING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577031
BIODEGRADABLE COOLER
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+13.9%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1594 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