Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 23, 2026
Application No. 18/626,340

INTEGRATED STRUCTURE OF STEEL FRAME ASSEMBLY AND STEEL SUPPORT FOR SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER STATION AND ASSEMBLING METHOD THEREFOR

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Apr 04, 2024
Priority
Oct 19, 2023 — CN 202311356010.4 +1 more
Examiner
MAESTRI, PATRICK J
Art Unit
3635
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Anhui Caesar New Energy Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allowance Rate
785 granted / 1071 resolved
+21.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1098
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
70.9%
+30.9% vs TC avg
§102
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§112
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1071 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 . This Office Action is in response to the Amendment dated June 1, 2026. Currently, claims 1-8 are pending in the application. Election/Restrictions Claims 1-4 are directed to an allowable product. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 821.04(B), claims 5-8, directed to the process of making or using an allowable product, previously withdrawn from consideration as a result of a restriction requirement, are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. Because all claims previously withdrawn from consideration under 37 CFR 1.142 have been rejoined, the restriction requirement as set forth in the Office action mailed on January 26, 2026 is hereby withdrawn. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement as to the rejoined inventions, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01. 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 5-8 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 5: It is unclear what “on a design drawing” means. Are these process steps to be completed in the physical world? Does it mean the foundations are at a prescribed distance from each other or similar? It is unclear what “performing a height regulation” means. It is unclear what “a ground pile” is. It is unclear what “purlines” are. Are they the same as “purlins” as recited in claims 1-4? It is unclear what “relatively” long means. “Relatively” is a term of degree that has not been defined and therefore makes the claim indefinite. It is unclear what “constructors” are. It is unclear what “absorbing, by a robot” means. It is unclear what it means “to ensure the space between the U-shaped purlines” means. It is unclear what steps are involved in “completing the mounting”. Regarding claim 6: It is unclear what a “double-connection guarantee” means. Claim 6 recites the limitation "the double-connection guarantee" in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Regarding claims 7 and 8: It is unclear how a mounting structure comprises “setting up the U-shaped purlines…”. How does a mounting structure (apparatus) comprise setting up (a method step)? Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-4 are allowed. Claims 5-8 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: the closest prior art of record being Lin (US 2025/0343502), Hafter et al. (US 2024/0297614), Patton et al. (US 2024/0186945) do not teach the specific zero-gap folding edge flange. 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 PATRICK J MAESTRI whose telephone number is (571)270-7859. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7-3. 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, Brian Mattei can be reached at 571-270-3238. 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. /PATRICK J MAESTRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 04, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 01, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 07, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12662818
TARP SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SECURING A TARP TO A ROOF OR OTHER STRUCTURE
3y 2m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12662812
STEEP SLOPE ROOFING PANEL SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 2m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12662823
FLAPPER SUSPENSION SYSTEM FOR KINETIC FAÇADES
1y 9m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12650016
METHODS FOR INSTALLING A MOUNTING BRACKET TO A T-BAR
2y 0m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12637864
PLATE FOR ROOFING APPLICATIONS WHERE A ROOF MEMBRANE HAS BEEN CUT OPEN FOR INSPECTION OR INSULATION REPLACEMENT AND MUST BE STITCHED BACK TOGETHER, AND A METHOD OF USING THE SAME
2y 4m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+14.8%)
2y 0m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1071 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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