Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/676,222

BAND BASKETS AND RELATED METHODS

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
May 28, 2024
Examiner
WALLACE, KIPP CHARLES
Art Unit
3674
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Legacy Tool And Rental LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
717 granted / 914 resolved
+26.4% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
938
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
54.0%
+14.0% vs TC avg
§102
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
§112
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 914 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Claim Objections Claims 15 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: these claims should recite “the spring cage”. Appropriate correction is required. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 08/19/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s argument that Ca fails to disclose the open end as claimed, this is not persuasive since the upper end of the basket does have an annular opening (groove 230 presents an annular region of open space cut away from 222). If applicant wishes to distinguish from Ca, language such as “wherein the annular opening is configured to allow debris to enter the basket when he BHA is in the well” is encouraged. References such as US 2993539 A, US 2663370 A, US 20210372214 A1 teach such openings. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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) 1-3, 5, 7-9, 11, 13-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Cajiles (US 20200131874 A1), hereinafter Ca. With respect to claim 1, Ca discloses a band basket for use on a bottom hole assembly (BHA) in a borehole of a well, the band basket comprising: a basket (222) having an inner wall, an outer wall, and a plurality of radial holes connecting the inner wall and the outer wall (shown in figs. 2F, 2G); and an annular opening (230) at a top end of the backet, wherein the bottom end is more proximate to a spring cage (226, a spring can be seen inside of 226 in figs. 2F, 2G, 2B, 2C), and a bushing (224) attached to a bottom end of the basket. With respect to claim 2, Ca further discloses a non-deformable structure (222 is meant to retain its shape as indicated by the cross hatching and lack of any mention of easily deformable materials). With respect to claim 3, Ca further discloses wherein the bushing is a removable bushing (threaded attachments such as those shown in figs. 2F, 2G, are removable). With respect to claim 5, Ca further discloses wherein the bushing is a female-to-female bushing (bushing received both 222 and 240 and is thus a female to female bushing despite external threads at the lower end. With respect to claim 7, Ca further discloses wherein the bushing further comprises an internal flange (at the lower end, which 240 rests on in figs. 2F, 2G) With respect to claims 8 and 9, Ca further discloses a gauge ring (portion of 220 which includes groove 230 and that is threaded to 222 as shown in figs. 2G, 2F) attached to a top end of the basket, wherein the gauge ring is a removable gauge ring (attached by threads and therefore removable). With respect to claims 11, 13, and 14, Ca further discloses wherein the basket is disposed on a mandrel (242 or combination 242, 282) of the BHA such that an annular space exists between the inner wall of the basket and an external wall of the mandrel (shown in fig. 2F, 2D), wherein the annular space is open at the top end of the basket (shown in fig. 2F), and wherein the band basket is fixedly positioned relative to the mandrel (shown in fig. 2F where 242 will no longer move relative to 222). With respect to claim 15, Ca further discloses wherein the bushing (224) directly connects the basket and a spring cage (226, a spring can be seen inside of 226 in figs. 2F, 2G, 2B, 2C) of the BHA. With respect to claim 16, Ca further discloses a method of collecting debris from a well bore, the method comprising: connecting a band basket to a bottom hole assembly (BHA), wherein the band basket comprises: a basket having an inner wall, an outer wall, and a plurality of radial holes connecting the inner wall and the outer wall; and a bushing attached to a bottom end of the basket (discussed supra); and removing the band basket from the well bore (pgph. 30). With respect to claim 17, Ca further discloses a gauge ring (portion of 220 which includes groove 230 and that is threaded to 222 as shown in figs. 2G, 2F) attached to a top end of the basket. With respect to claim 20, Ca further discloses wherein the bushing (224) directly connects the basket and a spring cage (226, a spring can be seen inside of 226 in figs. 2F, 2G, 2B, 2C) of the BHA. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 4 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ca in light of Winslow (US 5029643 A), hereinafter Win. With respect to claim 4, Ca discloses wherein the basket is a straight walled cylinder (shown in fig. 2F) and the bushing and basket being connected by threads but fails to disclose the set screw and groove. Nevertheless, Win discloses wherein members are connected by threads in addition to a set screw in a groove (screw 166 in groove of 156, fig. 3C). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have included a set screw and groove to connect the bushing and basket of Ca in addition to the threads as taught by Win (fig. 3C) since this is the application of a known technique in a similar device to improve it in the same way with predictable and obvious results. With respect to claim 10, it would also have been obvious to have connected the gage ring with a set screw and groove in addition to threads as taught by Win (fig. 3A, screw 204 and groove). Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ca in light of Clemens (US 20200378205 A1). With respect to claim 6, Ca fails to disclose a female to female unthreaded bushing. Nevertheless, Clemens discloses a female to female unthreaded bushing (326) for connecting an open ended basket (328) of a debris collector (208) to another member (302). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used set/shear screws 336 to connect the bushing of Ca to the adjacent elements instead of threads as taught be Clemens (fig. 3, pgph. 20), since this is the simple substitution of one prior art device for another with predictable results and a reasonable expectation for success. Claim(s) 12, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ca in light of Loving (US 20140202699 A1). With respect to claim 12, Ca discloses a tight-fitting and retaining relationship between locking member 250 of bushing and member 240 (pgphs. 23, 25, 27) but fails to specifically disclose a sealing relationship here. Nevertheless, Loving discloses wherein an annular space between a mandrel (316) and a debris catching basket (322) is sealed at the distal, closed end (upper end in Loving, corresponding to the lower end in Ca) of the basket by the bushing (326, claim 3, figs. 3a-3b). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have created a seal at the lower, distal, closed end of the basket of Ca using the bushing as taught by Loving (claim 3) in order to retain fines as taught by Loving (claim 3). The limitations of claims 18 and 19 are substantially similar to those of claims 11 and 13, rejected supra. 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 KIPP CHARLES WALLACE whose telephone number is (571)270-1162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 12:00 PM - 8:00 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, Doug Hutton can be reached at (571) 272-4137. 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. /KIPP C WALLACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674 10/28/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 28, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Aug 19, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 28, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595707
SUB-ASSEMBLY, ROCK DRILLING RIG, AND METHOD OF ABSORBING VIBRATIONS IN DRILLING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595728
PACK OFF INDICATOR FOR A WELLBORE OPERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590495
RETROFITTING EXISTING RIG HARDWARE AND PERFORMING BIT FORENSIC FOR DULL BIT GRADING THROUGH SOFTWARE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590502
AUTOMATIC SETTING SUPPORT FOR A SLIP HANGER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12572986
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DRILLING A WELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.2%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 914 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