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

SLIDE FASTENER SEALING SYSTEMS AND METHODS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 29, 2024
Examiner
MERCADO, LOUIS A
Art Unit
3677
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
YKK (U S A ) Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
529 granted / 666 resolved
+27.4% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
709
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
32.9%
-7.1% vs TC avg
§102
44.8%
+4.8% vs TC avg
§112
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 666 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 16 (Figs. 47-59) and claims 15-27 in the reply filed on 02/18/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-14 and 28-52 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Drawings The drawings are objected to because the reference number 5026 should be 5028 from figure 52, and reference number 5042 is missing the leader line from figure 51. 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. Claim Objections Claims 1 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 16 “position-able” should be - - positionable - -. Claim 16, line 9 “the element fill” should be - - the element fills - -. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claims 15-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Myerscough et al. (US Patent No. 11,033,081), in view of Matsuda et al. (US Patent No. 9,265,308). Regarding claim 15, Myerscough et al. discloses a slide fastener sealing system comprising: (a) a slide fastener comprising: (i) a first slide fastener segment comprising a first tape segment, a second tape segment, fastening elements positioned along the first and second tape segments (see annotated Fig. 9), (ii) a second slide fastener segment comprising a third tape segment, a fourth tape segment, fastening elements positioned along the third and fourth tape segments (see annotated Fig. 9), (iii)wherein the first slide fastener segment overlaps the second slide fastener segment (see annotated Fig. 9), and wherein a sealing zone forming a passage is located between the overlap of the first and second slide fastener segments (see annotated Fig. 9); and (b) a sealing member comprising a sealing body position-able in the passage to resist fluid movement through the passage when the fastening elements engage the first and second tape segments together and engage the third and fourth tape segments together (see annotated Fig. 9); (c) wherein, when the sealing member is positioned in the passage and the fastening elements engage the first and second tape segments together and engage the third and fourth tape segments together, the first, second, third, and fourth element fills block a fluid flow path along the passage in gaps between the fastening elements (see annotated Fig. 9). Myerscough et al. does not disclose, a first element fill on the first tape segment between at least some of the fastening elements; a second element fill on the second tape segment between at least some of the fastening elements; a third element fill on the third tape segment between at least some of the fastening elements; and a fourth element fill on the second tape segment between at least some of the fastening elements. However, Matsuda et al. teaches an element fill (5) on the tape segment (3) between at least some of the fastening elements (10) (see Fig. 1) Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first, second, third, and fourth tape segments from Myerscough et al. by adding element fill on each tape segment as taught by Matsuda et al. in order to seal between the tape segments when the tape segments are together and engage. PNG media_image1.png 320 630 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 16, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein: (a) when the fastening elements (10) engage the first and second tape segments (3) together, the first element fill (5) compresses against the fastening elements (10) of the second tape segment (3) and the second element fill (5) compresses against the fastening elements (10) of the first tape segment (3) (see Fig. 1 and 4 from Matsuda et al.); and (b) when the fastening elements (10) engage the third and fourth tape segments (3) together, the third element fill (5) compresses against the fastening elements (10) of the fourth tape segment (3) and the fourth element fill (5) compresses against the fastening elements (10) of the third tape segment (3) (see Fig. 1 and 4 from Matsuda et al.); wherein the compression of the element fill against the fastening elements (10) resists penetration of fluid along a length of the passage (see Fig. 1 and 4 from Matsuda et al.). Regarding claim 17, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein: (a) when the fastening elements (10) engage the first and second tape segments (3) together, an inner edge of the first tape (3) compresses against an inner edge of the second tape (3) to resist penetration of fluid through the first slide fastener segment (1) (see Fig. 1 and 4 from Matsuda et al.); and (b) when the fastening elements (10) engage the third and fourth tape segments (3) together, an inner edge of the third tape (3) compresses against an inner edge of the fourth tape (3) to resist penetration of fluid through the second slide fastener segment (1) (see Fig. 1 and 4 from Matsuda et al.). Regarding claim 18, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein an inner edge of the first element fill (5) is coextensive with or inset relative to the inner edge of the first tape (3) (see Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.). Regarding claim 19, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein a height of the first element fill (5) from the first tape segment (3) is less than a height of the fastening elements (10) from the first tape segment (3) that are positioned along the first tape segment (3) (see Fig. 1 and 4 from Matsuda et al.). Regarding claim 20, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein fastening elements of the second tape segment extend over the first element fill when the fastening elements engage the first and second tape segments together; wherein fastening elements (10) of the first tape segment (3) extend over the second element fill (5) when the fastening elements (10) engage the first and second tape segments (3) together; wherein fastening elements (10) of the fourth tape segment (3) extend over the third element fill (5) when the fastening elements (10) engage the third and fourth tape segments (3) together; and wherein fastening elements (10) of the third tape segment (3) extend over the fourth element fill (5) when the fastening elements (10) engage the third and fourth tape segments (3) together (see Fig. 1 and 4 from Matsuda et al.). Regarding claim 21, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein: (a) an inner edge of the first element fill (5) is coextensive with or inset relative to the inner edge of the first tape (3); (b) an inner edge of the second element fill (5) is coextensive with or inset relative to the inner edge of the second tape (3); (c) an inner edge of the third element fill (5) is coextensive with or inset relative to the inner edge of the third tape (3); and (d) an inner edge of the fourth element fill (5) is coextensive with or inset relative to the inner edge of the fourth tape (3) (see Fig. 1 and 4 from Matsuda et al.). Regarding claim 22, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses, wherein, when the sealing member is positioned in the passage and the fastening elements engage the first and second tape segments together and engage the third and fourth tape segments together, the first, second, third, and fourth element fills (5) compress against heads of the fastening elements (10) (see Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.). Regarding claim 23, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein the first, second, third, and fourth element fills (5) are only located along part of a length of the first and second slide fastener segments (1) (see Fig. 1 from Matsuda et al.). Regarding claim 24, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein the first, second, third, and fourth element fills (5) are a deformable material molded onto the first, second, third, and fourth tape segments (3) between the fastening elements (10) in the sealing zone (see Fig. 1 from Matsuda et al.). Regarding claim 25, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein the fluid flow path comprises a tortious fluid flow path between opposing fastening elements (10) along the length of the passage (spaces between (10) see Fig. 1 from Matsuda et al). Regarding claim 26, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein the fluid flow path comprises a first tortious fluid flow path between opposing fastening elements (10) of the first and second tape segments (3) and a second tortious fluid flow path between opposing fastening elements (10) of the third and further fourth tape segments (3) (spaces between (10) see Fig. 1 from Matsuda et al). Regarding claim 27, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein the first tortious fluid flow path is bounded by and in between the first and second tape segments (3) and the sealing body; and wherein the second tortious fluid flow path is bounded by and in between the third and fourth tape segments (3) and the sealing body (spaces between (10) see Fig. 1 from Matsuda et al). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOUIS A MERCADO whose telephone number is (571)270-5388. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Jason W. San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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. /LOUIS A. MERCADO/ Examiner Art Unit 3677 /JASON W SAN/ SPE, Art Unit 3677
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 29, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599246
BED SHEET RETENTION SYSTEMS, SYSTEM COMPONENTS, AND METHODS OF MAKING AND USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12569038
GARMENTS WITH SEMI-PRECIOUS STONE SNAPS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557883
SYSTEM FOR INTERLOCKING FASTENER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12553495
CORD STOPPER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12540639
Fastening Clip
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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
79%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+17.9%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 666 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