Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/741,852

Wine Storage Device

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 13, 2024
Examiner
VOLZ, ELIZABETH J
Art Unit
3733
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
722 granted / 1082 resolved
-3.3% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
58 currently pending
Career history
1140
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
41.3%
+1.3% vs TC avg
§102
32.9%
-7.1% vs TC avg
§112
21.4%
-18.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1082 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Election/Restrictions Claim 20 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/23/25. Claim Objections Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 8, “font face” should read –front face--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jiang (CN111084496). Regarding Claim 1, Jiang discloses a wine storage device (Figure 1) that provides a user with a specialized storage device for wine bottles while drinking outdoors, the wine storage device comprising: a body component 12 (Figure 1); a hole component 7/15 (Figure 1; figure 14); and at least one leg component 221 (figure 6); wherein the body component and the hole component are adapted to fit an entire wine bottle (Figure 14, fits in bag); and further wherein the body component is placed on the ground and supported via the at least one leg component (Figure 1). 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. Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang (CN111084496) in view of Thornley (U.S. Pub. No. 20130186306). Regarding Claim 2, Jiang teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the body component is a plastic structure configured in a square shape. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to be square since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the form or shape of a component. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP2144.04(IV)(B) Regarding Claim 3, Jiang discloses the body component comprises a front face and a rear face with the hole component in a center of the front face (Figure 1). Claim(s) 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang (CN111084496) in view of Thornley (U.S. Pub. No. 20130186306) and Giegerich (U.S. Pub. No. 20040139892). Regarding Claim 4, Jiang and Thornley teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the hole component is lined with cloth and has a cloth bottom and sides deep enough to fit an entire wine bottle. However, Giegerich teaches the hole component is lined with cloth and has a cloth bottom and sides deep enough to fit an entire wine bottle (paragraph 20). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jiang and Thornley to include the above, as taught by Giegerich, in order have a durable material. Regarding Claim 5, Jiang discloses the at least one leg component extends downward from the rear face of the body component (Figure 1). Regarding Claim 6, Jiang discloses at least one leg component 221 (Figure 3) is composed of hinges and pivots which allow the at least one leg component to extend up and twist, then bend flat until sitting flush on the front face of the body component (Figure 3, legs fold into figure 6). Regarding Claim 7, Jiang discloses the at least one leg component and the hole component collapses into itself to allow the device to be a simple square for storage and transportation (Figure 6). Claim(s) 13-15, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang (CN111084496) in view of Giegerich (U.S. Pub. No. 20040139892). Regarding Claim 13, Jiang discloses a wine storage device (Figure 1) that provides a user with a specialized storage device for wine bottles while drinking outdoors, the wine storage device comprising: a body component 12 (Figure 1) comprising a front face and a rear face (Figure 1); a hole component 15 (Figure 1); and four leg components 221/222 (figure 6); wherein the body component comprises the hole component in its center (Figure 1); wherein the hole component is a circular opening in the font face of the body component (Figure 1); wherein one of the four leg components are secured to each corner of the rear face of the body component (Figure 3); wherein the four leg components extend downward from the rear face of the body component (Figure 3); and further wherein the four leg components are secured via a hinge and pivot to allow the four leg components to extend upwards and fold onto the front face of the body component for storage (Figure 6). Jiang does not disclose wherein the body component is configured in a rectangular shape and wherein the hole component is lined with a cloth pocket sized to retain a wine bottle. However, Giegerich teaches the hole component is lined with a cloth pocket sized to retain a wine bottle (paragraph 20) and it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to be rectangular since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the form or shape of a component. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP2144.04(IV)(B). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jiang to include the above, as taught by Giegerich, in order have a durable material. Regarding Claim 14, Jiang teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the cloth pocket is comprised of canvas and conforms to the shape of the wine bottle. However, Giegerich teaches the cloth pocket is comprised of canvas and conforms to the shape of the wine bottle (paragraph 20, figure 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jiang to include the above, as taught by Giegerich, in order have a durable material. Regarding Claim 15, Jiang discloses the four leg components hinge up towards the rear face and are secured against the rear face of the body component for storage (Figure 6). Regarding Claim 18, Jiang discloses the four leg components can be removed for storage (figure 1, capable of disconnecting from the table top). Regarding Claim 19, Jiang teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for a plurality of indicia. However, Giegerich teaches a plurality of indicia (paragraph 20). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jiang to include the above, as taught by Giegerich, in order to decorate and identify the device. Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06 II(A), MPEP 2163.06 and MPEP 714.02. The ''disclosure'' includes the claims, the specification and the drawings. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 8-12, 16 and 17 are 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 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J VOLZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm est. 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. /ELIZABETH J VOLZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 13, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600528
PACKAGE AND CLOSURE FOR PACKAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595885
NONUNIFORM WALL THICKNESS PROFILE FOR TEARDROP PRESSURE VESSELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577039
WASTE MANAGEMENT RECEPTACLE SYSTEM FOR CONTAINMENT OF ODOROUS WASTE AND METHOD OF USING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12559304
SECURE BIN FOR SELECTIVE DEPOSIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12559307
TRASH CAN ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
67%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+18.5%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1082 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