Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/709,682

ACTUATABLE TOY ANIMAL

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 13, 2024
Examiner
WEISS, NICHOLAS J
Art Unit
3711
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Wecool Toys Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
265 granted / 440 resolved
-9.8% vs TC avg
Strong +42% interview lift
Without
With
+42.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
483
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
44.3%
+4.3% vs TC avg
§102
22.6%
-17.4% vs TC avg
§112
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 440 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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, 2, 9, 11, 16, & 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakayama 5,037,345 in view of Al-Saleh 9,427,054. Nakayama Shows a toy animal in which objects 60 which represent food are inserted into the mouth of the animal. The objects pass through and can be removed from the animal and reused. Nakayama does not disclose that the size of the animal increases in response to inserting toy food. A toy animal that expands to simulate growth would increase the play value of the toy. For example, Al-Saleh shows a toy animal into which objects C are inserted, and the size of the animal increases in proportion to the number of objects inserted. This expansion system would be an obvious addition to the toy of Nakayama, to suggest growth in response to food inserted. With regard to claim 2, the toys of Nakayama and Al-Saleh include electrical and mechanical components powered by a battery. With regard to claims 9 and 11, Nakayama includes a sensor to detect insertion of the simulated food, and a speaker for appropriate sound effects. Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakayama in view of Al-Saleh as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of McGrath et al 7,115,014. The toy of Nakayama does not appear to have walking ability. A walking toy would increase the play value. For example, McGrath shows that a toy with walking limbs, operated by a remote control. This walking ability with remote control would be an obvious addition to the toy of Nakayama. Claim(s) 10, & 19-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakayama in view of Al-Saleh as applied to claims 1, 2, 9, 11, 16, & 18 above, and further in view of Ponomarev et al 9,814,993. The toy of Nakayama does not appear to include a system to track interactions and changes to the toy, and transmit the information to a remote location. The ability to track and display changes would increase the play value. For example, Ponomarev shows that a toy may collect information onto a non-transitory computer readable medium, with software to store characteristics of the toy, and transmit the information to a remote location, including social media. This storage and transmission function would be an obvious addition to the toy of Nakayama. Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakayama 5,037,345 in view of Al-Saleh 9,427,054 as applied to claim 11, above, and further in view of Sapkus et al 4,246,722. The toy of Nakayama and Al-Saleh shows a growth mechanism, operated by electric power. It may be desired to activate the mechanism without electric power, for example if the battery runs out. For example, Sapkus shows that a doll may exhibit growth, with a manual actuator 31. This manual mechanism would be an obvious addition to the doll of Nakayama and Al-Saleh. Claim(s) 23, 27, & 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakayama 5,037,345 in view of Al-Saleh 9,427,054 as applied to claim 11, above, and further in view of Harris et al 5,655,946. The toy of Nakayama includes simulated food, but it is not clear if there is a storage container. A food container would help store the parts neatly. For example, Harris shows that simulated food for a doll may include a storage dish. This dish would be an obvious addition to the toy of Nakayama. With regard to claim 30, the food objects have a textured surface that facilitates sensing, as claimed. Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakayama 5,037,345 in view of Al-Saleh 9,427,054 and Harris et al 5,655,946 as applied to claim 11, above, and further in view of Villano et al 2017/0151504. It is not clear if the toy of Nakayama may include a bandana. A bandana would increase the play value. For example, Villano shows a toy with a bandana. This bandana would be an obvious addition to the toy of Nakayama. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN A RICCI whose telephone number is (571)272-4429. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Fri. 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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at 571-270-1775. 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. /JOHN A RICCI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 13, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12485201
Adhesive For An Absorbent Article
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
Patent 12465530
ELASTIC MEMBER AND DISPOSABLE WEARING ARTICLE INCLUDING ELASTIC MEMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
Patent 12447041
A COLLECTING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 21, 2025
Patent 11389573
Ear Water Suction Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 19, 2022
Patent 10799060
BREW BASKET FOR AUTOMATED BEVERAGE BREWING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2020
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
60%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+42.5%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 440 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