Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/633,921

INSTALLATION ARRANGEMENT FOR A TOILET SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 12, 2024
Examiner
DEERY, ERIN LEAH
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Kohler India Corporation Private Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
452 granted / 778 resolved
-11.9% vs TC avg
Strong +49% interview lift
Without
With
+49.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
806
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
43.9%
+3.9% vs TC avg
§102
16.7%
-23.3% vs TC avg
§112
33.3%
-6.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 778 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s arguments regarding the restriction requirement between inventions I and III have been fully considered and are persuasive. Accordingly, the restriction between Inventions I and III is withdrawn. Applicant’s non-election (and cancellation of the associated claims) of invention II is acknowledged. Claims 1-9 and 12-20 remain for examination. Drawings Figure 1a, 1b should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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 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) 1 - 7, 9, 12 -18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102018105161 (hereinafter DE ‘161) in view of Sieth (US 5,127,111) EP 3296473 (hereinafter EP ‘473). Regarding claim 1, DE ‘161 discloses an installation arrangement for a toilet system (fig. 2), wherein the toilet system includes a toilet bowl (5) defining a mounting cavity (20) on a rear side thereof(16, 17), the installation arrangement comprises: a first unit adapted to enable mounting of the toilet bowl on a wall (fig. 3), the first installation unit including: a mounting pin (14) adapted to be mounted on the wall; a mounting bracket (2) adapted to carry weight of the toilet bowl thereon; and a mounting nut (21) adapted to lock the mounting bracket mounted on the mounting pin. DE ‘161 does not show that the mounting nut is a flange nut, instead appearing to show a separate washer. Attention is turned to Sieth which teaches that it is common to use a flange nut (52) to lock a structure (44) onto a wall (12’)(fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have provided a flange nut in place of the separate nut and washer in order to reduce the part count and make installation simpler. DE ‘161 does not explicitly show two installation arrangements for engagement with two mounting cavities. Attention is turned to DE ‘473 which teaches a similar toilet having first and second mounting assemblies (2) in associated first and second mounting cavities (10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have provided first and second mounting installations and cavities to better distribute the weight of the toilet on the wall. Regarding claim 2, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, and further shows that the mounting brackets each define a through-hole (12) for receiving the mounting pin therethrough and a slanted protruded surface (3, 6) adapted to lock and support the toilet bowl thereon, and wherein the mounting brackets are each mounted on the respective mounting pin, to be fixed thereon, by the mounting flange nut (see fig. 3). Regarding claim 3, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention and further the slanted protruded surface of the mounting bracket enables locking of the toilet bowl to the wall. See fig. 3. Regarding claim 4, as shown in figure 3, the mounting brackets (2) are a single part structure adapted to be received in the mounting cavities. See continuous hatch marks in fig. 3 Also note that element 8 is a spacer device not part of the bracket and the claim does not have closed construction. Regarding claim 5, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, and further shows the mounting brackets each define a continuous flat surface (4) adapted to hold the weight of the toilet bowl thereon by the continuous flat surface. Regarding claim 6, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, and further shows the mounting brackets each define a wall mounting surface on a rear side thereof, the wall mounting surface adapted to come into contact with the wall when mounted thereon. See annotated figure below. Regarding claim 7, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, and further provides the mounting brackets each define a flange nut interfacing surface on a front side therefore, the flange nut interfacing surface adapted to come into contact with the respective flange nut. See annotated figure below. Regarding claim 9, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above and further shows that the wall is the wall of a toilet cabinet (13, abstract). Regarding claim 12, DE ‘161 discloses a toilet system (fig. 2) comprising, a toilet bowl (5) defining a mounting cavity (20) on a rear side thereof(16, 17), and a first installation unit adapted to enable mounting of the toilet bowl on a wall (fig. 3), the first installation unit including: a mounting pin (14) adapted to be mounted on the wall; a mounting bracket (2) adapted to carry weight of the toilet bowl thereon; and a mounting nut (21) adapted to lock the mounting bracket mounted on the mounting pin. DE ‘161 does not show that the mounting nut is a flange nut, instead appearing to show a separate washer. Attention is turned to Sieth which teaches that it is common to use a flange nut (52) to lock a structure (344) onto a wall (12’)(fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have provided a flange nut in place of the separate nut and washer in order to reduce the part count and make installation simpler. DE ‘161 does not explicitly show two installation arrangements for engagement with two mounting cavities. Attention is turned to DE ‘473 which teaches a similar toilet having first and second mounting assemblies (2) in associated first and second mounting cavities (10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have provided first and second mounting installations and cavities to better distribute the weight of the toilet on the wall. Regarding claim 13, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, and further shows that the mounting brackets each define a through-hole (12) for receiving the mounting pin therethrough and a slanted protruded surface (3, 6) adapted to lock and support the toilet bowl thereon, and wherein the mounting brackets are each mounted on the respective mounting pin, to be fixed thereon, by the mounting flange nut (see fig. 3). Regarding claim 14, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention and further the slanted protruded surface of the mounting bracket enables locking of the toilet bowl to the wall. See fig. 3. Regarding claim 15, as shown in figure 3, the mounting brackets (2) are a single part structure adapted to be received in the mounting cavities. See continuous hatch marks in fig. 3 Also note that element 8 is a spacer device not part of the bracket and the claim does not have closed construction. Regarding claim 16, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, and further shows the mounting brackets each define a continuous flat surface (4) adapted to hold the weight of the toilet bowl thereon by the continuous flat surface. Regarding claim 17, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, and further shows the mounting brackets each define a wall mounting surface on a rear side thereof, the wall mounting surface adapted to come into contact with the wall when mounted thereon. See annotated figure below. Regarding claim 18, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, and further provides the mounting brackets each define a flange nut interfacing surface on a front side therefore, the flange nut interfacing surface adapted to come into contact with the respective flange nut. See annotated figure below. Regarding claim 20, DE ‘161 as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above and further shows that the wall is the wall of a toilet cabinet (13, abstract). PNG media_image1.png 478 786 media_image1.png Greyscale Claim(s) 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE ‘161, Sieth, and EP ‘473, as applied to claims 1 and 12, in view of Stonecipher et al. (US 8,528,121 hereinafter Stonecipher). Regarding claims 8 and 19, DE ‘161 shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, but is silent as to the material of the brackets. Attention is turned to Stonecipher which teaches a wall mounted urinal bracket (210) made from ABS plastic (col. 8, ln. 14-25). It would have been obvious to have formed the brackets form ABS plastic since it is rigid, tough, and stable under load. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. MPEP 2144.07. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Reed (US 784,962), DE 1093741, and GB 1005686 all show brackets for a wall mounted sanitary unit representative of the prior art. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN L DEERY whose telephone number is (571)270-1928. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur, 7:30am - 4:30pm; Fri 8:00am-12:00pm. 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, David Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. 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. /ERIN DEERY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 12, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601421
CONNECTING ROD DRIVE MECHANISM FOR WATER DISCHARGE VALVE AND WATER DISCHARGE VALVE HAVING SAID MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601161
FAUCET MOUNTING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590445
FAUCET INSTALLTION ASSEMBLIES AND METHODS OF INSTALLING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584326
POOL GUTTER AND WALL ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577768
Touchless Toilet Assembly
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+49.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 778 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