Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/668,998

Handle Assembly

Final Rejection §103
Filed
May 20, 2024
Examiner
LUGO, CARLOS
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Illinois Tool Works Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
929 granted / 1243 resolved
+22.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
1294
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
41.8%
+1.8% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
37.6%
-2.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1243 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 . This Office Action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 10/31/25. 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 and 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102013016885 to Flach et al (Flach) in view of US Pat Application Publication No 20230258029 to Philippe et al (Philippe) and US Pat No 9,458,649 to Fujiwara et al (Fujiwara). PNG media_image1.png 605 686 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Flach discloses a handle assembly for a door having a handle aperture. The assembly comprises a housing and having a housing opening, being configured to be aligned with the handle aperture of the door; a cover plate (4) having a closed position and an open position, and the cover plate being configured to close the handle aperture of the door in the closed position and to open the handle aperture of the door in the open position; and a transmission device (7) disposed in the housing and connected to the cover plate. Wherein, the transmission device is configured to be capable of moving the cover plate between the closed position and the open position in response to an electronic signal and, when the cover plate is in the closed position, moving the cover plate to the open position by a pushing force from outside of the cover plate. Flach discloses the transmission device comprises a rotating shaft (16) being capable of rotating in response to an electronic signal or a mechanical force and at least one connecting member (18). Wherein, one end of the at least one connecting member is connected to the rotating shaft to rotate with rotation of the rotating shaft, and the other end of the at least one connecting member is rigidly hinged to the cover plate to enable the rotating shaft to move the cover plate by means of the connecting member or enable the cover plate to rotate the rotating shaft by means of the connecting member. First, Flach fails to disclose that the housing defines a cavity. As shown, the housing just comprises a receiving cavity (3) and is open at the top. PNG media_image2.png 582 1188 media_image2.png Greyscale Philippe teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a housing (16) that enclose all the elements of the device and defines a cavity therewithin. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the housing described by Flach as one defining a cavity, as taught by Philippe, in order to provide an enclosed structure. Second, Flach fails to disclose that the rotating shaft extends along the entire length of the cover plate. PNG media_image3.png 545 819 media_image3.png Greyscale Fujiwara teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a rotating shaft (38) for a cover plate (24), wherein the rotating shaft extends along the entire length of the cover plate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the shaft described by Flach to extend along the entire length of the cover plate, as taught by Fujiwara, in order to provide support and strength to the cover plate. As to claim 9, Philippe teaches that the cavity comprises an accommodating cavity, a receiving channel and an operating cavity. The receiving channel is located at the rear side of the housing opening, and the accommodating cavity and the operating cavity are respectively located at the opposite upper side and lower side of the receiving channel and interconnected to each other through the receiving channel. Wherein, the accommodating cavity of the housing is configured to accommodate the cover plate when the cover plate is in the open position, and the operating cavity of the housing is configured to at least partially accommodate an operator's hand for opening the door. As to claim 10, Philippe teaches that the handle assembly further comprises an operating element (42) comprising a sensing device configured to detect the operator's hand and to send a signal. As to claim 11, Philippe teaches that the sensing device is disposed on a side wall of the housing close to the housing opening to allow the operator's hand to access the operating cavity from the housing opening through the receiving channel so as to be detected by the sensing device. Claim(s) 2-4, 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102013016885 to Flach et al (Flach) in view of US Pat Application Publication No 20230258029 to Philippe et al (Philippe), US Pat No 9,458,649 to Fujiwara et al (Fujiwara), and further in view of DE 102020207532 to Lucke. As to claim 2, Flach, as modified by Philippe and Fujiwara, fails to disclose that the handle assembly further comprises a limiting structure disposed on the cover plate and a limiting fit structure disposed on the housing, and the limiting structure is engaged with the limiting fit structure; and wherein the transmission device, the limiting structure and the limiting fit structure enable the cover plate to move between the closed position and the open position. Flach discloses a pin (12) is disposed on the cover plate that moves as the cover plate moves. PNG media_image4.png 540 1227 media_image4.png Greyscale Lucke teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a handle assembly that comprises a cover plate (9) and a limiting structure (13) engaged with a limiting fit structure (14) for limiting and guiding the cover plate movement. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the assembly described by Flach, as modified by Philippe and Fujiwara, with a limiting structure/limiting fit structure, as taught by Lucke, in order to limit and guide the movement of the cover plate. As to claim 3, Flach discloses that the at least one connecting member is hinged to a top end of the cover plate to enable the top end of the cover plate to rotate circumferentially around the rotating shaft. As to claim 4, Flach illustrates that the pin (12) is capable of being disposed at the bottom of the cover plate. As to claim 5, Lucke teaches that the limiting structure comprises a limiting pin (13) disposed on at least one end of the cover plate in a left-right direction, and the limiting fit structure comprises a track slot formed on a side wall of the housing, and the limiting pin is capable of sliding in the track slot. As to claim 7, Flach discloses that the transmission device further comprises a driving gear (13) and a transmission gear (15) meshing with each other. The transmission gear (15) is in transmission connection between the rotating shaft (16) and the driving gear, so that the rotation of either of the driving gear and the rotating shaft is capable of driving the transmission gear to rotate, and in turn the transmission gear drives the other one of the rotating shaft and the driving gear to rotate. The driving gear and the transmission gear are configured such that, in response to an electronic signal, the driving gear is driven by a motor (8) to rotate so as to rotate the transmission gear and in turn move the cover plate by means of the connecting member; and, in response to a pushing force from outside of the cover plate, the cover plate rotates the rotating shaft by means of the connecting member so as to rotate the transmission gear and in turn drive the driving gear to rotate. As to claim 8, Flach discloses that the diameter of the driving gear (13) is greater than the diameter of the transmission gear (15). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 13-20 are allowed. Claims 6 and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments With respect to the objections to the abstract and claim 9, the current amendment overcomes the previous objections to the abstract and claim 9. With respect to the 102 rejections, the current amendment also overcomes the previous rejection to the claims in view of Peterson and Philippe. With respect to new claim 12, the current claim is objected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. As to new claims 13-20, the claims are allowed over the prior art of record. With respect to the 103 rejection in view of Flach, as modified by Philippe and further in view of DE 102020207532 to Lucke, the applicant argues that the prior art fails to disclose that the rotating shaft extends along the entire length of the cover plate, as now required by the amendment. Applicant’s arguments 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. At the instant, Fujiwara teaches that having a rotating shaft extending the entire length of the cover plate is well known in the art. Therefore, in view of the new prior art, the rejection to the claims is maintained. Prosecution has been closed. 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 CARLOS LUGO whose telephone number is (571)272-7058. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6pm. 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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571)272-7376. 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. /Carlos Lugo/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3675 January 25, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 20, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 31, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 25, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601209
FLUSH HANDLE ASSEMBLY FOR A VEHICLE DOOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598713
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR OPENING A RECEIVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595692
AUTO FLUSH DOOR HANDLE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584330
LATCH ASSEMBLY WITH REMOVABLE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578054
Double Door Retainer
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+14.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1243 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