Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/684,926

IRREVERSIBLE HYBRID ASCENT AND/OR DESCENT DEVICE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Feb 20, 2024
Examiner
WILSON, LEE D
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Euroup S R L
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
1458 granted / 1824 resolved
+9.9% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1858
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
§102
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§112
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1824 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive because the Title names describes an invention that does not work “ ‘{ Irreversible}’ Hybrid ascent and/or descent Device” which means the “ Irreversible” would suggest these parts do not move and in the case of a mechanical part it must be able to move. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because there Four abstracts and it is not clear which one the applicants want to select. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 1-8 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 following claims are vague, indefinite, awkwardly, confusingly worded and/or lacking proper antecedent basis: “it” is recited in claim 1 line 12 , claim 4, line 2, claim 5, lines 3 & 4, and claim 7, line 5. The limitation must be positively recited with the proper antecedent basis. The limitation is indefinite. Allowable Subject Matter The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not discloses nor teach an invention of claim 1 in its entirety and which at least teach and discloses a transmission means goes across a worm screw mechanism with a first nut which moves axially and second nut which is irreversible, a pulley with an elastic means being claimed in combination with at least the other limitations. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The 892 form discloses prior art being made of record. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEE D WILSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4499. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6;30-4;30. 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, BRIAN KELLER can be reached at 571-272-8548. 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. LEE D. WILSON Examiner Art Unit 3723 Ldw /LEE D WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 February 6, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 20, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599789
RESCUE ACCESS WEDGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595849
SEAL RING INSTALLATION MODULE AND SEAL RING INSTALLATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589976
LIFTING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583068
Clamping Arrangement
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12564923
MOUNTING TOOL FOR POSITIONING A SHAFT SEALING RING ON A SHAFT AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING A SHAFT SEAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
80%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+18.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1824 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