Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/721,385

GRASPING DEVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 18, 2024
Examiner
KHANDPUR, JAY
Art Unit
3658
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Bridgestone Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
185 granted / 218 resolved
+32.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
251
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
§103
62.6%
+22.6% vs TC avg
§102
13.1%
-26.9% vs TC avg
§112
7.6%
-32.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 218 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “A spoon-shaped” should be –a spoon-shaped--. There is no need for capitalization. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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, 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable and obvious over Curhan et al. (US Pub No: 2019/0143538 A1, hereinafter Curhan). Regarding Claim 1: Curhan discloses: A grasping device using a plurality of fluid pressure actuators that are curved during contraction, wherein the fluid pressure actuators are a flexible soft actuator. Paragraph [0059] describes a soft robotic actuator finger 100 that contracts upon a change in fluid pressure. The contraction causes curling in one direction or another. A spoon-shaped housing portion is provided at a tip portion of each of the fluid pressure actuators. Paragraph [0046] and figure 1A describes accordion extensions 104 that allows the actuator to bend or flex when inflate3d or deflated. and a partition plate is provided to close an opening surface of the housing portion when the fluid pressure actuator is non-curved or curved. Paragraph [0049] and figures 1A and 1C describe a valve 116 that allows fluid to enter an actuator. The flexible tubing 118 is also attached to an inflator valve 124 to regulate the supply of inflation fluid at the location. As is well known in the art, some valves have plates that can open and close to regulate fluids. Therefore, this meets the claim. Curhan does not explicitly disclose a partition plate because Curhan instead discloses a valve. However, the partition plate described in the invention is used to regulate the flow of fluid pressure, and likewise, the valve of Curhan accomplishes this same functional outcome, and both structures (partition plate and valve) are well known in the art since many valve systems for fluids also include a plate to regulate flow. Therefore, the Office finds that the valve of Curhan is an equivalent element found in the prior art useful for the same purpose as the claimed partition plate, and one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, with a reasonable expectation for success, would find it obvious to substitute the valve of Curhan with a partition plate, since their structural equivalency is recognized in the prior art and is not based solely on the application's disclosure. See MPEP 2144.06 (II) for further details ("Art Recognized Equivalence for the Same Purpose")." Regarding Claim 3: Curhan discloses: The grasping device according to claim 1, wherein the fluid pressure actuator is provided on both sides of the partition plate. Paragraph [0049] and figure 1A describes a valve 116 that allows fluid to enter the actuator 100 and can also exit if the valve is opened. The reason to add a partition plate is for the same reason as described in claim 1. Regarding Claim 4: Curhan discloses: The grasping device according to claim 1, wherein the partition plate forms a plurality of spaces, and the fluid pressure actuators are provided respectively in the plurality of spaces partitioned by the partition plate. Paragraph [0101] and figure 1A describes actuators 100 that are displaced around the gripper allowing it to curl. These are placed between the valve 116 and the inflator valve 124 shown in figure 1C. The reason to add a partition plate is for the same reason as described in claim 1. Claim(s) 2 and 5 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Curhan in view of Kanesugi (US Pub No: 2021/0395927 A1, hereinafter Kanesugi) Regarding Claim 2: Curhan discloses: The grasping device according to claim 1, wherein the fluid pressure actuators comprise: a tube that is cylindrical, and expands and contracts under fluid pressure. Paragraph [0049] and figure 1A describes a flexible tubing 118 that has a fluidic connection to the actuator which allows the tube to expand/contract. Curhan does not disclose a sleeve that covers a surface of a tube. Kanesugi, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches: and a sleeve having a stretchable structure in which fiber cords oriented in a predetermined direction are woven and that covers an outer peripheral surface of the tube. Paragraph [0002] describes a sleeve that is a cylindrical structure woven by high tensile strength fiber cords that regulates expansion movements of the tube. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, with a reasonable expectation for success, to have modified Curhan to incorporate the teachings of Kanesugi to show a sleeve that covers a surface of a tube. One would have been motivated to do so that the fluid tube is protected from sharp objects, dirt, debris and other contaminants. Regarding Claim 5: Curhan discloses: The grasping device according to claim 2, wherein the fluid pressure actuators comprise a restricting member provided inside in the sleeve from one end to another end in the axial direction of the tube. Figure 1A and 1C show a valve 116 and inflator valve 124 that controls the fluid flow through the flexible tubing 118. This is equivalent to the claim because the fluid flow restricts flow in the tube. Regarding Claim 6: Curhan discloses: The grasping device according to claim 2, wherein the fluid pressure actuator is provided on both sides of the partition plate. Paragraph [0049] and figure 1A describes a valve 116 that allows fluid to enter the actuator 100 and can also exit if the valve is opened. The reason to add a partition plate is for the same reason as described in claim 1. Regarding Claim 7: Curhan discloses: The grasping device according to claim 2, wherein the partition plate forms a plurality of spaces, and the fluid pressure actuators are provided respectively in the plurality of spaces partitioned by the partition plate. Paragraph [0101] and figure 1A describes actuators 100 that are displaced around the gripper allowing it to curl. These are placed between the valve 116 and the inflator valve 124 shown in figure 1C. The reason to add a partition plate is for the same reason as described in claim 1. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Miyoshi (US Pub No: 2025/0153371 A1): When each of the fluid pressure actuators contracts, the fluid pressure actuator of the grasping device is provided so that a tip portion of one of the fluid pressure actuators approaches a tip portion of other fluid pressure actuators, and a soft member is provided in a space on a proximal end portion side of the fluid pressure actuator surrounded by the plurality of the fluid pressure actuators. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY KHANDPUR whose telephone number is (571)272-5090. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 6:30. 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, Thomas Worden can be reached at (571) 272-4876. 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. /JAY KHANDPUR/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 18, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 01, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600366
APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING AUTONOMOUS DRIVING AND METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598375
REMOTE CONTROL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597277
LEARNING METHOD, LEARNING DEVICE, MOBILE OBJECT CONTROL DEVICE, MOBILE OBJECT CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591064
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR SENSOR OPERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588957
SURGICAL ROBOTIC SYSTEM WITH COMPLIANCE MECHANISM
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+10.7%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 218 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