Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/720,557

PLATE WITH OPENING AID FOR CANS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jun 14, 2024
Examiner
SMALLEY, JAMES N
Art Unit
3733
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
60%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
916 granted / 1304 resolved
At TC average
Minimal -10% lift
Without
With
+-10.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1340
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
40.5%
+0.5% vs TC avg
§102
28.2%
-11.8% vs TC avg
§112
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1304 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Drawings 1. The subject matter of this application admits of illustration by a drawing to facilitate understanding of the invention. Applicant is required to furnish a drawing under 37 CFR 1.81(c). No new matter may be introduced in the required drawing. 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). Examiner notes drawings are found in the priority document, but these are not formally filed drawings. Priority 2. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Objections 3. Claims 1 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 1, the limitation, “wherein the central edge provides a receptacle configured to receive the rivets is provided on the central edge” appears to be grammatically incorrect. A possible fix would be amending the limitation to say “…the rivets provided on the central edge” (deleting “is”). Further regarding claim 1, the claim switches between “the” and “said” when referring back to antecedent terms. The claim should be amended to consistently use either “said” or “the”. Regarding claim 9, the term “thickensing” (last line of the claim) appears to be a misspelling of “thickening”. Regarding claim 10, the term “the sliding aid” should be “the at least one sliding aid” for consistent use of claim terminology. Regarding claim 14, the claim appears to lack a transitional phrase. As presently worded, the claim begins, “…according to claim 1 at least one pushing aid…” The claim should be amended to say “…according to claim 1 wherein at least one…” Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 4. 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. 5. Claims 1-20 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, from which claims 2-20 depend, it is not clear if the term “an opening aid” on claim page 2 (document page 5), line 4 is to find proper antecedent basis in “an opening aid” in the first line of the claim. Further regarding claim 1, the limitation “the plate is curved with a curvature approximating a sphere of curvature having a curvature center that lies approximately on a longitudinal axis of the can and in a distal direction of the lower face” is indefinite, because it is not clear what the relationship is between the sphere of curvature and the distal direction. In other words, it is unclear what “a distal direction of the lower face” comprises, and thus it is unclear where the fixed point or frame of reference is for the sphere’s center of curvature. Further regarding claim 1, the terms “the can” in line 10 and “the beverage can” in the last line of claim page 1 (document page 4) lack proper antecedent basis in the claims. Examiner notes claim 1 limits “cans” in the first line of the claim. Further regarding claim 1, the claim varies between broadly claiming application to “cans”, for example “wherein the central edge provides a receptacle configured to receive the rivets is provided on the central edge”, and claiming specifics to a single can, e.g. “wherein said elevation is configured to engage with the lever of the can.” The claim should be amended to consistently claim application to a plurality of cans, or a single can. Further regarding claim 1, the term “generally-crescent shaped” is indefinite because it is not clear how close to being a crescent shape the object must be, in order to meet the claimed limitation. For purposes of this examination, the term is read as meaning “substantially”. Moreover, it is unclear in which frame of reference the element is crescent shaped, e.g. plan, front, cross-section. Further regarding claim 1, the limitation “said sliding face” (claim page 2 / document page 5, at line 8) lacks proper antecedent basis in the claims. Regarding claim 4, the terms “the elevations” and “each of the two sides” lack proper antecedent basis in the claims. Examiner notes claim 1 limits “an elevation”. Regarding claim 5, the term “the elevations” lacks proper antecedent basis in the claims. Examiner notes claim 1 limits “an elevation”. Regarding claim 6, it is unclear in which frame of reference the radial edge is curved. Regarding claim 8, it is unclear to which antecedent term the term “said curvature” refers. Examiner notes claim 1 introduces “a sphere of curvature”, and claim 8 introduces “a curvature”. Regarding claim 9, it is unclear if “the thickening that is at least 1.2 times…” is to find proper antecedent basis in “a thickening of the plate” earlier in the claim. Regarding claim 15, the claim is indefinite because it claims a can system (singular) but incorporates by dependency the plate structure of claim 1, which is defined by the preamble of claim 1 as “A plate structure with an opening aid for cans” (plural). It is unclear if the plate structure of the system of claim 15 is drawn for operation with a singular can or plural cans. Regarding claim 16, the claim is indefinite because it claims a method for producing a can system (singular) but incorporates by dependency the plate structure of claim 1, which is defined by the preamble of claim 1 as “A plate structure with an opening aid for cans” (plural). It is unclear if the plate structure of the method of claim 16 is drawn for operation with a singular can or plural cans. Allowable Subject Matter 6. Examiner notes that due to the number of indefinite rejections of claim 1, a proper corrected claim scope cannot be ascertained at this time. Accordingly, although the claim is not rejected over prior art under any of 35 USC 102 or 103, allowability of the claims cannot be indicated at this time. 7. The closest prior art the Examiner was able to locate was: a) US 4,852,763 (Dimberio) which teaches a can cover (36) comprising a central edge (42), a radial edge (unlabeled outer circumferential edge), two lateral edges (each 41) that each connect a respective end of the central edge and a respective end of the radial edge, the radial edge extends over a partial circle with an angle of at least 150o (see Figure 4 showing an extent of greater than 180o), but at least fails to teach a generally crescent-shaped elevation, a curvature approximating a sphere, and a groove anchor on radial edges. b) US 6,290,084 (Louie) which teaches a can cover (20) that includes a receptacle to receive rivets (unlabeled; located between flaps 28 and inclining body 24), and a generally crescent-shaped elevation (24), but at least fails to teach a curvature approximating a sphere, and a groove anchor on radial edges. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES N SMALLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4547. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am to 6:00 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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at (571) 270-5055. 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. /JAMES N SMALLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 14, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600532
CONTAINER FOR PACKING A FOOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595095
CLOSURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589922
CLOSING DEVICE FOR CONTAINERS AND ASSEMBLY COMPRISING A CONTAINER PROVIDED WITH SAID CLOSING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589920
PORTABLE STORAGE CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589916
BI-INJECTION MOLDED HOUSING OF A LOCKING CAP FOR A PHARMACEUTICAL VIAL, AND LOCKING CAP INCLUDING SUCH A HOUSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
70%
Grant Probability
60%
With Interview (-10.2%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1304 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month