Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/764,237

LOW PROFILE CLAMP WITH TOLERANCE COMPENSATION

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 04, 2024
Priority
Jul 05, 2023 — DE 102023117722.2
Examiner
SULLIVAN, MATTHEW J
Art Unit
3677
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Oetiker Schweiz AG
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
4-5
OA Rounds
3m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allowance Rate
686 granted / 1090 resolved
+10.9% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
1132
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
50.7%
+10.7% vs TC avg
§102
28.2%
-11.8% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1090 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 7/2/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-13 under 102, or in the alternative, 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 102 in view of Blair, U.S. Patent 1,705,895. 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 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blair, U.S. Patent 1,705,895. Regarding Claim 1, Blair teaches: First and second end portions (Fig. 3) adapted to overlap each other as inner and an outer clamping band portions when installing the clamp structure around an object to be fastened, connecting means (4, 7, 8) operable to mechanically interconnect the inner and outer clamping band portions, and tolerance compensation means (13-15) to impart stretchability to the clamping band in its longitudinal direction, characterized in that the tolerance compensation means includes the following adjacent band regions along the longitudinal direction of the clamping band that have a pair of lateral band edges extending outwardly and terminating in a common plane with the adjacent band regions so that the adjacent band regions are planar (see Fig. 2): a first band region (see below) in which the lateral band width between the pair of lateral band edges decreases from a first band width to a second band width between the pair of lateral band edges which is smaller than that first band width, a second band region (see below) in which the lateral band width between the pair of lateral band edges remains constant at the second band width, and a third band region (see below) in which the lateral band width increases to a third band width which is larger than the second band width; wherein all three band regions (51-53) of the tolerance compensation means have less material extending between the lateral band edges than the first band width of the clamping band to reduce from the first band width to the second band width (see below). PNG media_image1.png 291 721 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 2, Blair teaches: The third band width is equal to the first band width (see above). Regarding Claim 7, Blair teaches: The decrease of the band width in the first band region is linear (see above). Regarding Claim 8, Blair teaches: The increase of the band width in the third band region is linear (see above). 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) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blair ‘895. Regarding Claim 3, Blair ‘895 is silent with regard to the limitations of this claim, but does not disclose the sums of the first and third band regions. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art barring any unforeseen result to provide Blair ‘895 with the claimed dimensions because Applicant has not stated any specific problem solved by the claimed dimensions nor provided any unforeseen result stemming from the claimed dimensions and it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 [R-5]. Regarding Claims 4-5, the prior art(s) is/are silent with regard to the specific angles claimed because the angles of Blair ‘895 are clearly between 90° and 180° and because Applicant has not stated any specific problem solved by the claimed dimensions nor provided any unforeseen result stemming from the claimed dimensions and it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 [R-5]. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6 and 9-13 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 MATTHEW J SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5218. The examiner can normally be reached IFP, Typically M-Th, 8:00-6:00, regular Fr availability. 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, Jason San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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. /MATTHEW J SULLIVAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3677
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 4 earlier events
Feb 27, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 27, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 24, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 07, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Jul 02, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12740882
WEARABLE AUTOTENSIONING DEVICE
4y 0m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12735928
HINGE WITH ADJUSTABLE FRICTION
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12729572
DOOR HINGE
3y 5m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12714207
Surface Fastener
2y 0m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12687060
System for the controlled rotary movement of a door, a leaf or the like
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 21, 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
63%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+22.8%)
2y 6m (~3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1090 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