Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/742,014

EQUIPMENT TRANSPORT APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §101§102§103§DP
Filed
Jun 13, 2024
Examiner
GURARI, EREZ
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Teras Manufacturing Company LLP
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
729 granted / 932 resolved
+26.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
948
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
46.1%
+6.1% vs TC avg
§102
35.4%
-4.6% vs TC avg
§112
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 932 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102 §103 §DP
DETAILED ACTION Double Patenting A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claims 1-8 are provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-8 of copending Application No. 19/417,815 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented. 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) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Stallbaumer (US 6,308,967). In re claim 1, Stallbaumer teaches an equipment transport apparatus configured for being attached to a piece of equipment and for facilitating moving the piece of equipment between locations (that’s what hand trucks do), wherein the equipment transport apparatus comprises: a coupling block (12, 34) configured for being attached to the piece of equipment in a fixed position (“configured” – the use of straps is standard in the hand truck arts and Stallbaumer is “configured” for use with straps), wherein the coupling block comprises a wheel positioning flange (34) having a first opening and a second opening (38, 40); a wheel assembly rotatably coupled to the coupling block such that the wheel assembly is configured to rotate relative to the coupling block between a deployed configuration and a stowed configuration (figs. 1-2); and a position selector (36) coupled to the wheel assembly and configured to engage with the first opening in the coupling block when the wheel assembly is in the deployed configuration and with the second opening in the coupling block when the wheel assembly is in the stowed configuration (figs. 1-2). In re claim 2, Stallbaumer teaches the wheel assembly comprises: a shaft having a distal end (fig. 2, end connected to wheel), a proximal end (end connected to 29), and a longitudinal axis extending therebetween (long arms of 28); a wheel (23) rotatably coupled to an axle on the distal end of the shaft; and an arm fixedly coupled to the proximal end of the shaft, wherein the arm extends perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the shaft (handlebar 29). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stallbaumer (US 6,308,967) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Doheny (US 3,785,669). In re claim 6, Stallbaumer differs in that it does not explicitly teach the position selector comprises a quick release pin. Attention, however, is directed to Doheny which teaches the use of a quick release pin like device (23). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the position selector device of Doheny into the apparatus of Stallbaumer in order to allow for switching beteen deployed and stowed positions. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-5 and 7-8 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 EREZ GURARI whose telephone number is (571)270-1156. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00AM-6:30PM. 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, Allen Shriver can be reached at (303)297-4337. 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. /EREZ GURARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 13, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 26, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600395
MULTI CHILD STROLLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594857
SYSTEM SOLUTION FOR TWO-PHASE ELECTRIC MACHINE USED FOR VEHICLE PROPULSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594829
ELECTRIC WORK VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590439
WORKING VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589727
ENERGY CONTROL METHOD AND SYSTEM OF LIFT TRUCK
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
78%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+10.1%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 932 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