Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/698,489

VARIABLE DIE AND PRESSING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Apr 04, 2024
Examiner
KATCOFF, MATTHEW GORDON
Art Unit
3725
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Posco Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
668 granted / 964 resolved
-0.7% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
986
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
37.1%
-2.9% vs TC avg
§102
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
§112
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 964 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 1-14 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. Claim 1 claims “the actuator includes a structure” however applicant has claimed both “an actuator partially fixed to the base plate” and “a plurality of actuators…connected to the cam block”. As such it is unclear which actuator is “the actuator”. It is also unclear if the “a plurality of actuators” include the prior “an actuator”. Based on the disclosure there are only two actuators that meet the claim limitation and one of them is the “an actuator”. For claim 9, the phrase “the molding portion is disposed on both sides based on the seating portion” is indefinite as it is unclear what sides applicant is referring to. 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 6,755,070 to Jung (Jung) in view of EP 3,771,502 to Piccini et al (Piccini). Concerning claim 1, Jung discloses a variable die comprising: an upper die portion (1) and a lower die portion (3), wherein the upper die portion (1) includes an upper cam (11), the lower die portion (3) includes a lower body; a seating portion (19) connected to the lower body and on which a to-be-molded object is seated; and a molding portion (at 15) connected to the lower body, disposed on one side of the seating portion (19), including a lower cam (13) corresponding to the upper cam (11), and moving linearly in a first direction toward the seating portion (19) by the upper cam (11) and the lower cam (13), wherein the molding portion includes: the lower cam (13); a base plate (25) connected to the lower cam (13) and configured to be movable in the first direction; an actuator (40) partially fixed to the base plate (25); and a cam block (part of 25 attached to 15) connected to the actuator (40), and the actuator (40) includes a structure extendable in the first direction. However, Jung does not explicitly disclose a plurality of actuators spaced apart in a second direction, different from the first direction, are connected to the cam block. Piccini discloses a variable die comprising: a plurality of actuators (14) in figure 4. As such, it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan at the time of the invention to construct the apparatus of Jung having a plurality of actuators spaced apart in a second direction, different from the first direction, are connected to the cam block as this is merely duplication of parts (to account for a large sized die and having multiple actuators prevents movement issues which is well known in the art). Mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). As seen in Piccini, there is no new and unexpected result. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-8 and 11-14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose these claim limitations. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew Katcoff whose telephone number is (571)270-1415. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8-4, Fri: Flex. 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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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. /Matthew Katcoff/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725 03/05/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 04, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583145
ROUTER ATTACHMENT ADAPTOR AND COVER FOR SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582994
MODULAR SHREDDER RING FOR IMPLEMENTATION IN WASTE DISPOSER AND RELATED METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577040
HANDHELD TRASH COMPACTION APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576552
Debarking Drum, Method and System for Debarking of Wood
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575513
STUMP GRINDER WITH GRINDING ARM AND CONTROL
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
69%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+15.7%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 964 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