Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/629,828

Folding Chair with Wheel Assembly and Coupling Mechanism

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Apr 08, 2024
Examiner
BONZELL, PHILIP J
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
680 granted / 865 resolved
+26.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
898
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.4%
+5.4% vs TC avg
§102
28.2%
-11.8% vs TC avg
§112
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 865 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 . Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph [0043] states “152b176+” and the end of the second sentence. Appropriate correction is required. 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 telescopic upright supports of Claims 1, 2, and 5 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 164, 166, 178, 180, 182, 186, 188. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “106” has been used to designate both chair connector and wheel assembly. 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. 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 Objections Claim 5 objected to because of the following informalities: “first back leg, position adjacent a second end” in lines 13-14 should be amended to --first back leg or position adjacent a second end--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 5 objected to because of the following informalities: there should be an --or-- after “the first back leg,” in line 17. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 7 objected to because of the following informalities: “the first side wheel” should be amended to --the first side wheel assembly--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 7 objected to because of the following informalities: “a first end” in line 3 should be amended to --the first end-- so as to maintain proper dependency. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 1-10 objected to because of the following informalities: the claims are repeat with grammatical errors, namely proper singular or plural from agreement, i.e. Claim 1 has “second side structures” but it should be --second side structure--. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-10 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. For Claims 1, 2, and 5 the Applicant defines a telescopic upright support which it also states in the specification but does point to the specific structure and how it telescopes i.e. translates along the longitudinal axis with respect to itself. How is mounted between a front seat corner and one of the legs but then comprises a first back leg extending upwardly from the first leg, a second back leg extending upwardly from the second leg? Is the telescopic upright support just the entire scissor leg mechanism? As such it is not clear what the structure is, and therefore the claim is indefinite. Claims 2-4 and 6-10 are indefinite as being dependent on Claims 1 and 5. For Claim 10, a container is positively claimed however the claim is to a folding chair, as such the container is not part of the chair. Therefore it is unclear if the contain is positively claimed and the claim is indefinite. The Examiner suggest claiming a system comprising the folding chair of Claim 1 and further comprising a container so as to be definite. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the rear feet" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated as best understood by Yu (US Patent #6247749). For Claim 1, figures 2-9 of Yu ‘749 disclose a folding chair comprising: a frame assembly constructed of a plurality of pivotally connected scissor-like cross-shaped structures, including a front transverse structure (12) and a rear transverse structure (14), a first side structure (16) and a second side structure (18); a plurality of legs comprising a first, second, third, and fourth leg; a seat (44) suspended between an upper vertices of the cross-shaped structures; and a plurality of telescopic upright supports (20a and 22a) mounted between a front seat corners and one of the legs, the plurality of telescopic upright supports being retractable into a retracted positions when the folding chair is unfolded; wherein the front transverse structures and the rear transverse structures and the first and second side structures define a rectangular parallelepiped expandable or collapsible symmetrically about an axis of symmetry, and wherein the telescopic upright supports enhance the tension and support of the seat while maintain compactness in the folded state. For Claim 2, figures 2-9 of Yu ‘749 disclose that the telescopic upright supports comprise a pair of parallel linearly telescopic members telescopically extendable and retractable between fully extended positions when the rectangular parallelepiped is fully collapsed and fully retracted positions when the rectangular parallelepiped is fully expanded. For Claim 3, figures 2-9 of Yu ‘749 disclose rear uprights mounted to the rear feat (28 and 30) and slidably mounted to rear seat corners of the folding seat, extending about the seat to enable a back support mounted therebetween. Claim(s) 5-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated as best understood by Fulks (US Patent #2006/0001242). For Claim 5, the figures of Fulks ‘242 disclose a folding chair, comprising: a frame assembly constructed of a plurality of pivotally connected scissor-like cross-shaped structures, including a front transverse structure and a rear transverse structure, a first side structure and a second side structure; a plurality of legs (9 and 13) including a first, second, third, and fourth leg; a seat (3) suspended between nan upper vertices of the cross-shaped structures; and a plurality of telescopic upright supports mounted between a front seat corner and one the legs, the plurality of telescopic upright support being retractable into a retracted position when the folding chair is unfolded, the plurality of telescopic upright supports comprises a first back leg extending upwardly from the from the first leg, a second back leg extending upwardly from the second leg; wheel assemblies (6) attached at a first position adjacent first and second ends of the first and second back leg (13); and a coupling mechanism (20-26) provided at a second position at a third end of a first back leg. For Claim 6, the figures of Fulks ‘242 disclose that the coupling mechanism comprises a chair connector (21), a connecting rod (22), a hinge, a snap fit connection clip (25) and a flexible joint. For Claim 7, the figures of Fulks ‘242 disclose that the wheel assemblies (6) include a first side wheel assembly and a second side wheel assembly, the first side wheel assembly is arranged adjacent the first end of the first back leg and the second side wheel assembly is arranged adjacent the second end of the second back leg. For Claim 8, the figures of Fulks ‘242 disclose that the wheels of the wheel assemblies are rotatable and allow the folding chair to be maneuvered over various surfaces. For Claim 9, the figures of Fulks ‘242 disclose that the coupling mechanism (20-26) includes a quick-release mechanism for easy attachment and detachment to the chair. 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) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (US Patent #6247749) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fulks (US PgPub #2006/0001242). For Claim 4, while Yu ‘749 is silent about a first and second armrest, Fulks ‘242 teaches armrests (4) on a similar folding chair. Therefore it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Yu ‘749 with the armrests of Fulks ‘242. The motivation would be to have a more comfortable chair. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fulks (US Patent #2006/0001242) as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of May (US PgPub #2004/0178665). For Claim 10, while Fulks ‘242 is silent about a container, figure 2 of May ‘665 teaches a container (30) for housing a folding chair (2), wherein the container comprises a window designed to expose the wheels of the folding chair out of the container. Therefore it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Fulks ‘242 with the container of May ‘665. The motivation to do so would be to provide a protective cover for the chair. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP J BONZELL whose telephone number is (571)270-3663. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5. 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, Joshua Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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. /PHILIP J BONZELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642 10/10/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 08, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600468
VERTICAL TAKE-OFF AND LANDING (VTOL) WINGED AIR VEHICLE WITH COMPLEMENTARY ANGLED ROTORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595077
SATELLITE CONSTELLATION FORMING SYSTEM, DEBRIS REMOVAL SCHEME, SATELLITE CONSTELLATION CONSTRUCTION SCHEME, GROUND FACILITY, SPACE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, SPACE OBJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT, AND OPERATION METHOD FOR AVOIDING COLLISION DURING ORBITAL DESCENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595058
AIRCRAFT GALLEY MOVEABLE COUNTERTOP
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589855
WINDOW MOUNTING STRUCTURE FOR SNAP AND CLICK MOUNTING OF A WINDOW ASSEMBLY OF AN AIRCRAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12559220
BLENDED WING BODY AIRCRAFT AIRFRAME AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
79%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+11.8%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 865 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month