Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/648,407

CARPET

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Apr 28, 2024
Examiner
IMANI, ELIZABETH MARY COLE
Art Unit
1789
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Zhejiang Lizhuo Carpet Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
33%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 7m
To Grant
58%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 33% of cases
33%
Career Allow Rate
311 granted / 930 resolved
-31.6% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 7m
Avg Prosecution
77 currently pending
Career history
1007
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
73.5%
+33.5% vs TC avg
§102
4.9%
-35.1% vs TC avg
§112
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 930 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . The amendment filed 2/24/26 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: “When preparing the linen blocks, linen fibers are combed and laid out into a linen felt. Then, the linen felt is soaked in latex, dried, and hot-pressed to form a linen mat. Finally the liner mat is cut into the linen blocks”. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification as originally filed does not provide support for the limitation that each of the linen blocks are made by bonding and compressing linen fibers. 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 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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao et al, CN 216797267, (equivalent to U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0134291 which is relied on for citations below) in view of Gordon, U.S. Patent No. 2,856,323 and Gleich et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0196081. Cao discloses a carpet comprising a face layer which is the top layer and an adhesive anti-slip layer having an anti-slip bottom which is the bottom layer. The face layer and the adhesive anti-slip layer are detachably connected through an extension layer. See figures and paragraphs 0010-0014. The anti-slip layer can include an elastic layer which can include a plurality of block-like elastic materials spliced together. See paragraph 0015. Cao does not disclose that the block-like elastic materials are linen blocks. However, Gordon teaches forming carpet backing/padding by combining natural fibers such as jute with a rubber latex binder. See col. 3, lines 43-61. While Gordon teaches jute instead of linen, note that Gleich teaches a structure comprising natural fibers such as cotton, linen, hemp, jute, ramie or sisal which are bound together by a latex binder to form a pad which can be used to manufacture carpet. See paragraphs 0050, 0088 and 0001. Therefore, it would have been obvious to have employed natural fibers such as linen in a rubber latex as taught by Gordon and Gleich to form the elastic blocks of Cao in view of the art recognized suitability of such structures as carpet backing and to have selected suitable dimensions for the blocks/padding to provide properties such as cushioning and sound deadening without using excessive materials and avoid excess weight. Applicant's arguments filed 2/24/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the features of each of the linen blocks are made by bonding and compressing linen fibers as well as the amendments to the specification are not new matter because the term linen blocks means that the linen fibers are bonded and compressed into blocks. However, the term “linen blocks” does not appear to be a term of art. There are multiple ways of forming a block of linen, including processing fabrics or processing loose fibers, mechanically intertangling, bonding with synthetic fibers, bonding with glue, foams, etc., bonding multiple fabric layers, forming thick fabric layers by interweaving or three dimensional knitting, etc. The addition to the specification and claims is therefore new matter because the term linen block is not a term of art and does not have a standard recognized structural definition or a standard process of making. 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 ELIZABETH M IMANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1475. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Wednesday 7AM-7:30; Thursday 10AM -2 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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. /ELIZABETH M IMANI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 28, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Feb 24, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582896
SHIN GUARD MADE OF AUXETIC MATERIAL AND UNIT STRUCTURE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12559650
ADHESIVE ARTICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12546083
Heavy Duty Silt Fence Using Nonwoven Silt Retention Fabric
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12540435
FABRIC FOR A FIBER WEB PRODUCING MACHINE AND A METHOD FOR MAKING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12532943
Fiber-Bound Engineered Materials Formed as a Synthetic Leather
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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
33%
Grant Probability
58%
With Interview (+25.1%)
4y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 930 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