Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/631,127

DECK CLIP

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Apr 10, 2024
Examiner
CAJILIG, CHRISTINE T
Art Unit
3633
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Primesource Building Products, INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
710 granted / 1006 resolved
+18.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1035
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
42.3%
+2.3% vs TC avg
§102
26.7%
-13.3% vs TC avg
§112
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1006 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 § 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)(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) 1-7 and 9-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2010/0257806 to Snell et al. (“Snell”). Regarding claim 1, Snell in Fig. 2 discloses a deck clip comprising: a spacer 110 having a wing 130/320 resiliently pivotably connected (130 flexes by pivoting inward toward opening 310) to a support bar, the support bar having a front face (outer left face of 110 that abuts 520) and a lower face (lower face of 110 – see Fig. 2, the arrow of 110 points to the lower face); and a grip 120 slidably engageable with the spacer, the grip having a pin 520/125 abutting the front face and extending beyond the lower face (surface where arrow 110 points in Fig. 2). Regarding claim 2, Snell discloses a pressing portion 510 of the grip abuts an upper face of the support bar. Regarding claim 3, Snell discloses a hook 320 extending from the support bar 110 captures the pressing portion 510 against the upper face. Regarding claim 4, Snell discloses that the grip 120 and the spacer 110 define a width between a front edge of the pin and a rear face of the support bar. Regarding claim 5, Snell discloses that the pin 520/125 extends further from the front face (outer left face of 110 that abuts 520) than the wing 320. Regarding claim 6, Snell discloses that the wing 130/320 includes a connector (vertical portion of 130 extending from 110 and up to arm 320) and an arm 320. Regarding claim 7, Snell discloses that the connector is arcuate. Regarding claim 9, Snell discloses that the wing 130/320 is connected to the support bar 110 via a stem (vertical portion of 130 extending from 110) extending from an upper face of the support bar. Regarding claim 10, Snell discloses that the wing 130/302 (wing on left side) extends outwardly relative to the front face. Regarding claim 11, Snell discloses that the stem is located at a first end (upper end) of the support bar. Regarding claim 12, Snell discloses that the wing 130/320 is connected to the support bar via an insertion plate (vertical portion of 130 extending from 110). Regarding claim 13, Snell discloses that the wing 130 is connected to a first end (upper end) of the insertion plate and extends rearwardly (130 on the left side shown in Fig. 2 extends toward the front face) towards the front face (outer left face of 110 that abuts 520). Regarding claim 14, Snell discloses that the insertion plate 130 extends from a first end (upper end) of the support bar. Regarding claim 15, Snell discloses that the wing 130/320 extends upwardly relative to the support bar. Regarding claim 16, Snell in Fig. 2 discloses a deck clip comprising: a grip 120 having a pin 520/125 extending from a pressing portion 510, the pin and the pressing portion defining an inner shoulder (90 degree bend portion); and a spacer 110 having a support bar 110 configured to matingly engage the inner shoulder. Regarding claim 17, Snell discloses that the pin 520/125 abuts a front face (outer left face of 110 that abuts 520) of the support bar. Regarding claim 18, Snell discloses that the spacer 110 includes a wing 320 resiliently pivotably connected to the support bar (flex by pivoting inward toward opening 310). Regarding claim 19, Snell discloses that the spacer 110 and the grip 120 define a width between a front edge of the pin and a rear face of the support bar. Regarding claim 20, Snell discloses that the pin 520/125 extends beyond a lower face (lower face of 110 – see Fig. 2, the arrow of 110 points to the lower face) of the support bar. Claim(s) 16, 17, and 19 is/are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 102014115257 to Stiehler (“Stiehler”). Regarding claim 16, Stiehler in Figs. 1, 2, and 4 discloses a deck clip 1 comprising: a grip 20 having a pin 21 extending from a pressing portion 22, the pin 21 and the pressing portion 22 defining an inner shoulder (90 degree bend portion); and a spacer 10 having a support bar 19 configured to matingly engage the inner shoulder (see Fig. 4). Regarding claim 17, Stiehler discloses that the pin 21 abuts a front 19 of the support bar. Regarding claim 19, Stiehler discloses that the spacer 10 and the grip 20 define a width between a front edge of the pin and a rear face 11 of the support bar. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 21 is allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 8, none of the prior art, alone or in obvious combination absent hindsight, discloses applicant’s invention of a deck clip comprising inter alia a wing that includes an arcuate connector and an arm, wherein the connector that extends from the front face and loops back rearwardly toward a rear face of the support bar. The closest prior art to Snell does not disclose a wing with a connector as recited in claim 8. Snell’s wings extend from an upper face and placing it in the front face would render Snell’s clip as inoperable. Moreover, while cited prior art US D924044 discloses a deck clip with a wing that extends from a front face and loops back rearwardly toward a rear face, D924044 does not disclose a grip having a pin abutting the front face and extending beyond a lower face of the spacer. Regarding claim 21, none of the prior art, alone or in obvious combination absent hindsight, discloses applicant’s invention of a method to construct a deck assembly as recited in the claim. While the closest prior art to Snell discloses substantially each element of the claim, Snell’s pin 520/125 is driven into the groove of the deck board instead of the joist. Only the spacer 110 makes contact with the joist 220. Modifying Snell to have its pin contact the joist would materially alter Snell’s invention in that the pin would be of a size such that it could not be inserted into the deck board’s groove. Moreover, while another cited prior art US 11629509 discloses pins 114 that are driven into joists as a result of compression, the pins 114 are part of a unitary spacer and not a grip slidably engaged in a spacer. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE T CAJILIG whose telephone number is (571)272-8143. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm. 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 Glessner can be reached at 571-272-6754. 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. /CHRISTINE T CAJILIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 10, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 27, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595674
SELF-SUPPORTING LOCULUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577774
Modular Collapsible Building Frames
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577940
Segment and system for a Scruton helix, Scruton helix, tower and method for mounting a Scruton helix
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571207
Logging Notch Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559933
TRANSPORTABLE, RECONFIGURABLE HARSH ENVIRONMENT WORKSPACE
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
71%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+14.5%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1006 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