Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 17, 2026
Application No. 18/760,183

DEVICE FOR ASSEMBLING THREE WORKPIECES TOGETHER

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jul 01, 2024
Priority
Jan 10, 2024 — CN 202410041914.6 +1 more
Examiner
WILSON, LEE D
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Global Manufacturing Partners Holdings Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
1489 granted / 1860 resolved
+20.1% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1879
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
§102
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§112
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1860 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show A single drawing showing the assembled device as the workpiece is shown traveling from each part of the body to form the end product which would also show how the device is constructed as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 1-9 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited. The following claims are vague, indefinite, awkwardly, confusingly worded and/or lacking proper antecedent basis: Claim 1 has three periods and the claim will only be examined to the first period. Parts 2 and 3 of claim 1 lack antecedent basis. Claim 2 has two periods and the claim will only be examined to the first period. Claims 2-9 are lacking proper antecedent basis due to subject matter in the other two periods not being part of the claim which will create antecedent problems. Claim 5 has three periods and the claim will only be examined to the first period. Parts 2 and 3 of claim 5 lack antecedent basis. “it” is recited in claims 1 and 4, The limitation must be positively recited with the proper antecedent basis. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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 as best understood in view of the 112 rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Kashibe 6622906. Kashibe discloses the claimed invention as recited in the claims as shown below: A device for assembling three workpieces together, comprising a device body (1), wherein the device body (1) is provided with a feeding mechanism 20 (2) for outputting a first 5 workpiece (101) upwards, a horizontal rod 40b (3) for providing a second workpiece (102) to be placed on it, and a limit seat 11 (4) for limiting the third workpiece (103). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and an Accurate New Drawing is provided. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The 892 form discloses prior art being made of record. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEE D WILSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4499. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6;30-4;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, BRIAN KELLER can be reached at 571-272-8548. 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. LEE D. WILSON Examiner Art Unit 3723 Ldw /LEE D WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 August 27, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 01, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12734619
WELDING CLAMP
3y 2m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12734624
HOLDER PLATE FOR NEGATIVE PRESSURE CHUCKING, HOLDER DEVICE FOR NEGATIVE PRESSURE CHUCKING, AND DE-BONDING STATION
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12733448
APPARATUS FOR PROCESSING A WAFER
4y 0m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12733449
PIN LIFTING DEVICE
3y 7m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12728610
ASSEMBLY PRESS TOOLHOLDER
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 08, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+18.7%)
2y 9m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1860 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