Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/736,367

INTEGRATED KITCHEN SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 06, 2024
Examiner
MUSSELMAN, TIMOTHY A
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
One Enterprises LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
542 granted / 936 resolved
-12.1% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
965
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.1%
-29.9% vs TC avg
§103
55.3%
+15.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§112
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 936 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 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. Claims 1-4, 8-14, and 16-17, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bockheim et al. (US 7,551,432) in view of Sosan (US 11,581,914). Regarding claims 1-2, Bockheim discloses a stand with an internal space for storage, wherein the stand comprises a physical mating element for mating to an electronic display device. See fig. 24 and note the shelves with the display attached on front. The shelves could be used for storage as desired, which would include kitchen utensils. Bockheim discloses wherein the electronic display device attaches to a mounting panel which mostly blocks the view of the storage shelves (i.e. covering stored items). See col. 5: 17-20 and fig. 25. However, it is not really disclosed wherein this mounting system is configured for a tablet, nor wherein the display itself would block the view of the shelves (rather the mounting panel might block the view), However, various mounting schemes are established, including the trough scheme described by the mounting system of Sosan in col. 5: 59-63 and fig 1. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider such with the Bockheim system, so as to provide convenient and versatile display mounts. Regarding claims 3-4, Bockheim discloses wherein the internal storage space is recessed within the structure in figs. 24 and 25. Note the shelves are generally internal to the mounting structure (i.e. the are enclosed on all but the ends). Regarding claims 8-9, Sosan discloses wherein the mating component comprises a slide and lip system (i.e. the device slides in a trough). See col. 5: 59-63 and fig 1. The use of such a mating scheme would be obvious as described above with regard to claim 1. Regarding claim 10, Bockheim discloses a display device, which could presumably display recipes (recipes would just presented data, which is non-functional with regard to patentability). See col. 3: 58-64. Regarding claims 11-13, Bockheim discloses wherein the system is for storage. See col. 8: 13-22. There are not limitations as to what the system stores, and any of applicant’s claimed items could be stored. Regarding claims 14 and 16-17, Bockheim discloses a physical charging source for charging stored items (any items, such as electric utensils as per claim 16). See col. 9:68 – col. 10:3. Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bockheim et al. (US 7,551,432) in view of Sosan (US 11,581,914) and also Dorr et al. (US 2018/0013116). Regarding claims 5-7, Bockheim does not disclose wherein the recesses are outlined as utensils with finger notches. However, this storage fitting concept is established, as is disclosed by the storage system of Dorr in paragraph 0062 (one could already use utensils with the Bockheim system). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider such with the Bockheim system, so as to provide stable storage for items. Note this would also be an ‘other fastener’ per claim 7. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bockheim et al. (US 7,551,432) in view of Sosan (US 11,581,914) and also Perelli (US 2021/0059401). Regarding claim 15, Bockheim disclose a charger as described in col. 9: 1-3, but does not disclose an induction coil. However, this use of such is well-established, as is disclosed by the display system of Perelli in paragraphs 0147-0148. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider such with the Bockheim system, in order to provide an effective power source. Claim 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bockheim et al. (US 7,551,432) in view of Sosan (US 11,581,914) and also Chung et al. (US 2019/0125113). Regarding claims 18-20, Bockheim does not disclose a utensil wirelessly connected to the display device, which transmits measurement information. However, this precise configuration is established with regard to tablets and utensils, as is disclosed by the monitoring system of Chung in paragraphs 0011-0013. It would have been obvious to consider such a scheme with the tablet of the Bockheim system, as such use would just reflect use of the tablet in an expected manner as disclosed by Chung. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:00AM - 4:00PM. 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, PETER S VASAT can be reached at 571-570-7625. 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. TIMOTHY A. MUSSELMAN Primary Examiner Art Unit 3715 /TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 06, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599535
EXTERNAL COUNTERPULSATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576005
Cameras for Emergency Rescue
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573315
TRAINING LESSON AUTHORING AND EXECUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12548463
ELECTRONIC COUPLING OF CONTROLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12530981
MONITORING COMMUNICATIONS IN AN OBSERVATION PLATFORM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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
58%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+26.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 936 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