Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 06, 2026
Application No. 18/704,507

SEAT EXTENSION DEVICE FOR PROVIDING ZERO GRAVITY ATTITUDE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Apr 25, 2024
Priority
Jun 25, 2023 — CN 202321612463.4 +1 more
Examiner
LIBBY, TROY ALAN
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Zhejiang Feili Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allowance Rate
5 granted / 5 resolved
+48.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
23
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
50.0%
+10.0% vs TC avg
§102
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
§112
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 5 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Specification The substitute specification filed 6/22/2026 has not been entered because it does not conform to 37 CFR 1.125(b) and (c) because the applicant did not comply with 37 CFR 1.125 (c) by providing a marked up copy showing all of the changes. 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 1-6 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. Regarding claim 1, broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation “an angle β between the seat frame mounting surface and the ground being 28° - 50°”, and the claim also recites “when the angle β between the seat frame mounting surface and the ground is 30°” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. See a suggested amendment in the Response to Amendment section below. Regarding claim 4, it is unclear if “a plurality of side plates” is meant to be different from, or that of the same as, the “side plate” from claim 1. See a suggested amendment in the Response to Amendment section below. Response to Amendment The rejection to claim 1, under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), is maintained due to the broad limitation followed by the narrow limitation within the same claim still being present. It is suggested that the narrow limitation is canceled in claim 1 or canceled in claim 1 and rewritten as a new dependent claim. Regarding claim 4, there had previously been an antecedent basis issue due to the original claim 1 claiming “a side plate” and the original claim 4 mentioning, plurally, “the side plates”. As currently amended, “the side plates” of claim 4 to be “a plurality of side plates” creates uncertainty as to whether or not the side plates of claim 4 are the same as the side plate of claim 1. If the side plates of claim 4 are meant to be the same as the side plate of claim 1, but plural, it is suggested that claim 4 is amended to state: “The seat extension device for providing a zero gravity attitude according to claim 3, wherein the side plate comprises a plurality of side plates, wherein the plurality of side plates are hinged with the other ends of the third foot rod and the fourth foot rod, and the plurality of side plates are hinged with the backrest and a plurality of mounting guards.” Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-6 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TROY A LIBBY whose telephone number is (571)272-6676. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri; 7:30 AM - 2:30 PM EST. 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, DAVID DUNN can be reached at (571) 272-6670. 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. /T.A.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3636 /DAVID R DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 25, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 22, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 08, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12686309
ARMREST FOR A VEHICLE SEAT AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12668162
SEATBACK AND VEHICLE SEAT
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12660896
PIVOT SHAFT ASSEMBLY FOR A FOLDABLE DEVICE
1y 8m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 3 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
1y 11m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 5 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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