Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/640,043

WORKING VEHICLE INCLUDING NEUTRAL BIASING MECHANISM

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Apr 19, 2024
Examiner
PRATHER, GREGORY T
Art Unit
3618
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Kubota Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
360 granted / 525 resolved
+16.6% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
546
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.6%
-38.4% vs TC avg
§103
33.7%
-6.3% vs TC avg
§102
32.5%
-7.5% vs TC avg
§112
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 525 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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “34” (See para. [0059]). 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 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. (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) 1-5 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nishino (US2016/0025216). Nishino discloses: Re claim 1. A working vehicle comprising: a continuously variable transmission (abstract) capable of shifting to a forward side and a reverse side (para. [0058]); and a neutral biasing mechanism (abstract) configured to bias the continuously variable transmission to a neutral position; wherein the neutral biasing mechanism includes: a cam (26; See Fig. 3) connected to an operating shaft of the continuously variable transmission and provided with a concave cam section (29); an operator (27 including 33, 34, 32; see Fig. 3) swingable about an axis of a swing shaft (32) and configured to operate the cam to a neutral orientation corresponding to the neutral position by pressing the cam section; and a plurality of biasing members (40 & 41) configured to bias the operator such that the operator swings in a direction in which the operator presses the cam section; and the plurality of biasing members include two biasing members (40 & 41); the operator includes a first operator and a second operator (See annotated Fig. 3 below) configured to swing as one piece with the first operator; and the two biasing members (40 & 41) include a first biasing member (40) connected to a first connection point (at 40B) of the first operator and a second biasing member (41) connected to a second connection point (at 41B) of the second operator, and the second connection point is different from the first connection point (See Fig. 3). PNG media_image1.png 815 1050 media_image1.png Greyscale Re claim 2. The working vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the first connection point (at 40B) is in a portion on one side in the operator with respect to the swing shaft, and the second connection point (at 41B) is in a portion on another side in the operator with respect to the swing shaft (See annotated Fig. 3 below). PNG media_image2.png 815 1131 media_image2.png Greyscale Re claim 3. The working vehicle according to claim 1, wherein a line of action of a biasing force of the first biasing member connected to the first connection point is not parallel to that of the second biasing member connected to the second connection point (See Fig. 3, the springs 40 and 41 are not parallel to each other along their lengths, and so therefore the line of action of the biasing forces are not parallel). Re claim 4. The working vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the operator includes a rotatable roller (28; para. [0061]) configured to operate the cam to the neutral orientation corresponding to the neutral position by fitting into the cam section (See Fig. 3). Re claim 5. The working vehicle according to claim 1, wherein a distance from the first connection point to the axis of the swing shaft is different from that from the second connection point to the axis of the swing shaft (See Fig 3). Re claim 7. The working vehicle according to claim 1, wherein a transmission case (13) is provided behind the continuously variable transmission (S) (See Fig. 1; para. [0053]); and the second biasing member (41) extends between the second operator (See annotated Fig. 3 above) and the transmission case (connected to bracket 22 of transmission case 13. Compare to instant application where connection is via stay 34 (missing from Applicant’s drawings) (see Fig. 3 and para. [0055]). Re claim 8. The working vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the first biasing member (40) and the second biasing member (41) include coil springs with respective different lengths (See Fig. 3). Re claim 9. The working vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the first biasing member (40) and the second biasing member (41) include coil springs with respective different diameters (Coil spring 40 has two different diameters - the diameter of the wire/material making up spring 33 that is smaller than and therefore different from the diameter of the winding of spring 40. Likewise, coil spring 41 has two different diameters - the diameter of the wire/material making up spring 41 that is smaller than and therefore different from the diameter of the winding of spring 41. Furthermore, if the outer diameter of spring 40 is the same as the outer diameter of spring 41, then the outer diameter of spring 40 is different than the inner diameter of spring 41 and the inner diameter of spring 41 is different than the outer diameter of spring 41. Therefore, in multiple ways of interpreting claim 9, there are respective different diameters.). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The new grounds of rejection are necessitated by Applicant’s amendment. 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 GREGORY T PRATHER whose telephone number is (571)270-5412. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9 AM - 5 PM. 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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 571-270-7778. 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. /GREGORY T PRATHER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3618 /MINNAH L SEOH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 19, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Nov 07, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 15, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583312
ACTUATOR FOR ACTIVE GRILLE SHUTTLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578749
MULTIDIRECTIONAL INPUT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571458
LINEAR ACTUATOR WITH CUSHION MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571457
ACTUATOR, AND ROBOT, BRACE, AND HAPTIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12547204
CONTROL DEVICE FOR CONTROLLING REAL OR VIRTUAL AIRBORNE OBJECTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
69%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+20.5%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 525 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