Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/639,791

RATCHETING STRAP SYSTEM FOR A CHILD CAR SEAT

Final Rejection §102§Other
Filed
Apr 18, 2024
Examiner
BENEDIK, JUSTIN M
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
740 granted / 862 resolved
+33.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
878
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
48.5%
+8.5% vs TC avg
§102
32.7%
-7.3% vs TC avg
§112
13.4%
-26.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 862 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §Other
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 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 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) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Wilson et al. (US 20190366885). Wright discloses all of the limitations below: 1. A ratcheting strap system for a child car seat, comprising: a static strap assembly 31, comprising a static strap to connect to a component within a car at a first end of the static strap (element 5); a retractable strap assembly 4, comprising a retractable strap 4 to connect to another component within the car at a first end of the retractable strap (element 5), wherein at least a portion (any portion of the long strap of 4) of the retractable strap is threaded through a portion of the child car seat to secure the child car seat to a seat of the car; and a ratcheting system (seen generally around the toothed gear 7), comprising a ratcheting system housing (17, 21) to connect to a second end of the static strap at a first side of the ratcheting system housing and to connect to a second end of the retractable strap at a second side of the ratcheting system housing (clearly shown in fig. 6). the ratcheting system housing comprising: a locking pin slot (slot shown in Fig. 5 – where the protrusion of element 12 slidably goes through) disposed on a side portion of the ratcheting system housing, and a locking pin (protrusion of the element 12) disposed within the locking pin slot to move from a first position within the locking pin slot (upward toward 18) to a second position within the locking pin slot (downward toward the teeth 7) to lock the retractable strap at a desired length and tightness. 2. The ratcheting strap system for a child car seat of claim 1, wherein the ratcheting system further comprises: a retracting drum 3 disposed within the ratcheting system housing to allow at least a portion of the retractable strap to spool around the retracting drum 3, such that the retracting drum rotates in a first direction to allow the retractable strap to extend in length outside of the ratcheting system housing; and a handle 18 pivotably connected to the ratcheting system housing to cause the retracting drum to rotate in a second direction in response to the handle being pivoted, such that the retractable strap wraps around the retracting drum and such that the retractable strap shortens in length outside of the ratcheting system housing (operation clearly understood from the disclosure). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 12/24/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2 under Wright have been fully considered and are not persuasive. The element 12 of Wright discloses a protrusion through a slot which in a sliding relationship locks the pay out of strap when in the downward (toward drum 2) position. The protrusion acts as a locking pin to function as claim 1. 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 JUSTIN M BENEDIK whose telephone number is (571)270-7824. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00-3:00. 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 Huson can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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. /JUSTIN M. BENEDIK/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3642 /JUSTIN M BENEDIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 18, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §Other
Dec 24, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §Other (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589871
CONFIGURATION FOR VERTICAL TAKE-OFF AND LANDING SYSTEM FOR AERIAL VEHICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589896
INDUSTRIAL AERIAL ROBOT SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583630
ROBOTIC SYSTEM FOR CIVIL INFRASTRUCTURE INSPECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583637
MULTI-USE PLATFORM FOR A MOBILE ROBOT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12551735
Parachute Device for High-Rise Emergency Evacuations
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
86%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+10.5%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 862 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