Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/661,460

Semi-conic Tent and an Extension Tent

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
May 10, 2024
Examiner
CANFIELD, ROBERT
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Guangzhou Kaitu Environmental Protection Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
860 granted / 1133 resolved
+23.9% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
1164
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
37.0%
-3.0% vs TC avg
§102
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§112
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1133 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status This is a first office action on the merits for application serail number 18/661,460 filed 5/10/24. Claims 1-11 are pending. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first and second fixing pieces of the support frame [cl.1], the connection of the waterproof cloth to the support frame [cl.4] and the three connecting bands [cls. 2,4] must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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. The use of the term Velcro®, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore, the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term. Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification is replete with improper grammar and idiomatic English. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-11 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. There is an inadequate description of the first and second fixing pieces. It is not clear from the description what the corresponding structures are in the figures? It appears that stake 12 may be “the second fixing piece”? But what are the first fixing pieces? It is not what memorably fixed means in the specification? There is an inadequate description of the inner tent is used to open and close the semi-conic tent’s door [cl.7]. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims are is replete with improper grammar and idiomatic English. In claim 1, the language “the support frame is provided at least one” is unclear. In claims 1 and 5, it is not clear which second fixing piece “the second fixing piece” refers to as the claim defines plural second fixing pieces. Claim 1 recites at lines 8-9 that “one part of the connecting structure is arranged on the support frame” yet lines 3-4 recites that the support frame comprises the connecting structure? In claim 2, the language “provide with a least three” is unclear. And it is not clear which bands “the three bands” references. The article “a” should appear before “top end” and “two end of bottom of the support frame” is unclear. In claim 5, “the first tent cloth” and “the semi-conic tent’s door” lack antecedent basis. The term “near” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “near” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear how far or close “near” is. In claim 7, “the semi-conic tent’s door” lack antecedent basis. In claim 8, The article “a” should appear before “top side”. In claim 8, it is unclear which vent structure “the vent structure refences as “at least one vent structure has been defined. It appears it should read “the at least one vent structure” or “each vent structure”. Claim 10 depends from claim 9 which requires two supporting poles , one for each frame. The two tents cannot be connected both two and one pole. In claim 11, “the connecting outer tents” lack antecedent basis and “pace” appears to be a typo for “space”. 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. Claims 1, 3, 5 and 8, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent 7,841,356 to Shires. Shires provides semi-conic tent, comprising a support frame and a first outer tent (half of the tent on one side of curved frame pole 14), wherein the support frame is provided at least one; and the support frame is a square frame or a curved frame 14, each support frame further comprises first fixing pieces 15a/b, second fixing pieces 26 and a connecting structure (the other half of the tent on one side of curved frame pole 14 and/or guy lines 24); both ends of the support frame are respectively fixed on ground through the first fixing pieces 15a/b; one side of the first outer tent is connected with the support frame by sleeve 16 or loops/clips 113, and other side of the first outer tent is fixed on ground through the second fixing piece guy 24 and stake 26; the first outer tent and the support frame together enclose a conical space; one part of the connecting structure is arranged on the support frame, and other part is detachably fixed on the ground via stake 26; the connecting structure is arranged opposite to the first outer tent. With respect to claim 3, see weatherproof fabric 12. With respect to claim 5, the tent floor (unlabeled but referenced throughout the disclosure) is considered a waterproof ground sheet and zippered door 28 is the first opening/closing component. With respect to claim 8, see vents 40. Claims 1, 3, 5 and 8, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. 2001/0042563 to Coupounas. Coupounas provides semi-conic tent, comprising a support frame and a first outer tent, wherein the support frame is provided at least one; and the support frame is a square frame or a curved frame (the pole inside fist sleeve 22), each support frame further comprises first fixing pieces 15a/b, second fixing pieces 26 and a connecting structure 12/38/40/42; both ends of the support frame are respectively fixed on ground through the first fixing pieces 42; one side of the first outer tent is connected with the support frame by sleeve 22, and other side of the first outer tent is fixed on ground through the second fixing piece (line 40 and stake 42) the first outer tent and the support frame together enclose a conical space; one part of the connecting structure is arranged on the support frame, and other part is detachably fixed on the ground via stake 42; the connecting structure is arranged opposite to the first outer tent. With respect to claim 3, see waterproof fabric 12 [0021]. With respect to claim 5, the tent floor sheet 26 is considered a waterproof ground sheet and zippered end sheet 28 is the first opening/closing component. With respect to claim 8, see vents [0024]. 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 6, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2001/0042563 to Coupounas in view of U.S. 2016/0017631 to Gilmore. Coupounas provides each of the elements of the claim as noted above except an inner attachment sheet provided with an opening and closing. Gilmore teaches at the time of the effective filing date of the invention it was know to provide a tent with an inner divider sheet 111 sewn [0027] therein to divide the interior into at least two compartments. The divider provided with a panel 119 allowing access from one compartment to the other [0028]. It would have been obvious at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to one having ordinary skill in the art that the tent of Coupounas could have been provide in with an interior diver panel as taught by Gilmore to separate the interior space into two compartments one of which may be used to store objects. Moreover, all the claimed elements are known in the prior art and one skilled in the art would have combined the elements at the time of the effective filing date of the invention as claimed by known methods with a reasonable expectation of success with no change to their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art of providing an accessible compartment within the interior of the tent of Coupounas. No allowability determinations can be made at this time with respect claims 2, 4, 7 and 9-11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Particularly note: The embodiment of Figure 3 of U.S. Patent 7,406,977 to Shires which provide a substantially rectangular frame; and U.S. Patent 11,634,924 to Barnes et al. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT CANFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-6840. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6, some Saturdays. 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 Dunn can be reached at 571-272-6670. 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. ROBERT CANFIELD Primary Examiner Art Unit 3636 /Robert Canfield/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 10, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595676
HINGE-TYPE CONNECTOR FOR CONNECTING ONE-TOUCH FOLDING TENT FRAME MEMBERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593901
FOLDABLE CRUTCH STOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588765
ROCKING FURNITURE MEMBER WITH POWER SYNCHRONOUS MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584316
CANTILEVER UMBRELLA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575680
CONVERTIBLE PLATFORM FOR SUPPORTING A USER
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
76%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+18.0%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1133 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