Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 27, 2026
Application No. 18/741,492

CHILD SAFETY CAR SEAT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 12, 2024
Priority
Jul 28, 2017 — CN 201720939006.4 +5 more
Examiner
ABRAHAM, TANIA
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Wonderland Switzerland AG
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
3m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allowance Rate
608 granted / 838 resolved
+20.6% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
860
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
40.3%
+0.3% vs TC avg
§102
32.4%
-7.6% vs TC avg
§112
24.7%
-15.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 838 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pp 8 and 11, filed 27-Aug-26, with respect to independent claims 1 and 13 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of 3-Mar-26 have been withdrawn. Applicant's arguments, see pp 14-15, filed 27-Aug-26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The rejection of clam 19 under 35 USC 103 has been maintained. In response to applicant's argument (pp 14-15) that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). Applicant argues that one of ordinary skill in the art would not be taught by Knoff -exclusive of applicant’s disclosure- to configure the fireproof buffering structure as recited in claim 19, “wherein the first buffering plate includes a fifth surface and a sixth surface opposite to the fifth surface, the fifth surface of the first buffering plate is attached to the first surface of the fireproof plate, and the fireproof buffering structure further comprises a second auxiliary fireproof plate attached to the sixth surface of the first buffering plate.” However, Knoff teaches a variety of layering configurations of the fireproof and buffering plates as shown in figures 4A- 4C, and then teaches the obviousness of modifying those configurations in figures 5A-5E to include double layers of the fireproof plates as well as alternating layers of additional buffering and fireproof plates (col. 6: 46 – col. 7:9). Moreover, Knoff explicitly states that the layering configurations shown in the figures are “not intended to be limiting” (col. 6: 46-47). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would be taught or motivated to modify the configurations in a way that would yield the buffering structure set forth in claim 19; particularly, one of ordinary skill in the art would be taught or motivated to combine the teachings of figures 5C and 5E. Therefore, applicant’s argument is unpersuasive. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knoff (US 7421750). Claim 19- Knoff discloses a fireproof buffering structure having a plurality of fireproof and buffering plates (col. 2: 51-59), the fireproof buffering structure (with reference to fig. 5C) comprising: a fireproof plate (32) having a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface (top and bottom surfaces); a first buffering plate (33) attached to the first surface of the fireproof plate (figs. 4A-5E); and a first auxiliary fireproof plate (32) having a third surface and a fourth surface opposite to the third surface, the third surface of the first auxiliary fireproof plate is attached to the second surface of the fireproof plate (32); and a second buffering plate (33) attached to the fourth surface of the first auxiliary fireproof plate; wherein the first buffering plate (33) includes a fifth surface and a sixth surface opposite to the fifth surface, the fifth surface of the first buffering plate is attached to the first surface of the fireproof plate (32) (fig. 5C shows the claimed sequence comprising the first buffering plate 33, the fireproof plate 32, the first auxiliary fireproof plate 32, and the second buffering plate 33; with the exception of the second auxiliary fireproof plate). PNG media_image1.png 369 410 media_image1.png Greyscale Knoff discloses another similar fireproof buffering structure (with reference to fig. 5E), wherein the fireproof buffering structure comprises the structure as claimed with the exception of a fireproof plate functioning as the “first auxiliary fireproof plate”: a fireproof plate (32) having a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface (top and bottom surfaces); a first buffering plate (33) attached to the first surface of the fireproof plate (figs. 4A-5E); a second buffering plate (33) attached to the second surface of the fireproof plate; wherein the first buffering plate (33) includes a fifth surface and a sixth surface opposite to the fifth surface, the fifth surface of the first buffering plate is attached to the first surface of the fireproof plate (32), and the fireproof buffering structure further comprises a second auxiliary fireproof plate (32) attached to the sixth surface of the first buffering plate. PNG media_image2.png 398 402 media_image2.png Greyscale Knoff does not explicitly disclose the fireproof buffering structure comprising inter alia a fireproof plate and two auxiliary fireproof plates, as claimed: a first auxiliary fireproof plate having a third surface and a fourth surface opposite to the third surface, wherein the third surface of the first auxiliary fireproof plate is attached to the second surface of the fireproof plate; and a second auxiliary fireproof plate attached to the sixth surface of the first buffering plate. However, Knoff teaches (col. 6: 59- col. 7: 9) that a fireproof buffering structure (figs. 4A- 5E) can comprise a variety of buffering and fireproof plate arrangements (30, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42), including arrangements comprising multiple fireproof plates (32) that are suitable for yielding the predictable result of providing additional fire blocking to the buffering structure; wherein the arrangement shown in figure 5C teaches an auxiliary fireproof plate (32) attached to a second surface of a fireproof plate (32), and wherein the arrangement shown in figure 5E teaches an auxiliary fireproof plate (32) attached to a surface of the first buffering plate (33) that meets the limitation “sixth surface of the first buffering plate”. Based on these teachings, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to comprise a fireproof buffering structure with: a fireproof plate with a first surface attached to a fifth surface of a first buffering plate, a first auxiliary fireproof plate attached to a second surface of the fireproof plate, and a second auxiliary fireproof plate attached to a sixth surface of the first buffering plate in order to yield the predictable result of providing a fireproof buffering structure comprising two buffering plates, a fireproof plate, and two auxiliary fireproof plates. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 3-4, 6-7, 9-13, 15-18 and 20-23 are allowed. Claim 24 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANIA ABRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-2635. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am - 5:30 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, 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./Examiner, Art Unit 3636 /DAVID R DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 5 earlier events
Apr 18, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Nov 10, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 03, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103
May 21, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 27, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 31, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12765673
Contractible Sofa Linkage Device, Sofa Support, and Sofa
2y 8m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12759443
COVERING FOR A FASTENING DEVICE, AND VEHICLE SEAT
2y 10m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12759437
VEHICLE SEAT ADJUSTMENT ASSEMBLY
2y 7m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12734940
CHILD RESTRAINT
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12734942
CAR SAFETY SEAT
3y 0m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+17.0%)
2y 7m (~3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 838 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