Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/790,311

CUSHION, MANUFACTURING APPARATUS, AND A METHOD OF MANUFACTURE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 31, 2024
Examiner
HUSON, MONICA ANNE
Art Unit
1742
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Lear Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
1073 granted / 1352 resolved
+14.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
1395
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
44.8%
+4.8% vs TC avg
§102
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§112
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1352 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 Election/Restrictions Claims 8-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 13 February 2026. Applicant's election with traverse of Claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 13 February 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Groups II and III are not patentably distinct inventions. This is not found persuasive because the apparatus as claimed can be used to practice another and materially different process, such as one that does not require the step of extruding and/or shaping a subset of filaments with a non-planar profile. Further, the article as claimed can be made by another and materially different apparatus, such as one that does not require a funnel. Finally, the article as claimed can be made by another and materially different process, such as one that does not require the step of extrusion. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 (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. 102a1 as being anticipated by Glassen (U.S. Patent 2,593,665). Regarding Claim 1, Glassen shows an apparatus (Figure 1) comprising a funnel comprising a set of sides that cooperate to define an inlet opening and an outlet opening (element 26), and an actuator that is operatively connected to the funnel, wherein at least one member of the set of sides is vibratable by the actuator (Column 5, lines 66-75; Column 6, lines 1-19; Column 7, lines 30-39). Regarding Claim 2, Glassen shows the apparatus of claim 1 above, including one wherein the set of sides are fixedly positioned with respect to each other and the set of sides are vibratable by the actuator (Column 3, lines 68-75; Column 4, lines 1-9). 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glassen, in view of Whitten (U.S. Patent 5,971,690). Glassen shows the apparatus of claim 1 above, but he does not show a sheet that is disposed on the funnel sides. Whitten shows a funnel which comprises a sheet (liner) that is disposed on at least one member of the set of sides and that faces toward the inlet opening (element 25). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use Whitten’s liner in Glassen’s vibratable funnel in order to prevent damage to the funnel itself. Claim(s) 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glassen. Regarding Claims 4-5, Glassen shows the apparatus of claim 1 above, but he does not show movable funnel sides. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the sides of Glassen’s funnel movable in order to facilitate size adjustment of the funnel and because adjustability is not held to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2144.04 (V)(D)). Regarding Claim 6, Glassen shows the apparatus of claim 1 above, but he does not show a second actuator. It would have been obvious to include a second actuator for vibration in order to increase or localize the vibration availability and because duplication of parts has not patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(B)). Regarding Claim 7, Glassen shows the apparatus of claim 6 above, but he does not show movable funnel sides. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the sides of Glassen’s funnel movable in order to facilitate size adjustment of the funnel and because adjustability is not held to be a patentable advance (MPEP 2144.04 (V)(D)). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA HUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1198. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4p. 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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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. MONICA ANNE HUSON Primary Examiner Art Unit 1742 /MONICA A HUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 31, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 14, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600076
METHOD FOR OPERATING A CONTAINER TREATMENT SYSTEM AND CONTAINER TREATMENT SYSTEM WITH OPTIMIZED PARAMETERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594630
AMORPHOUS PHASE MODIFICATION APPARATUS AND PROCESSING METHOD OF SINGLE CRYSTAL MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589543
METHOD FOR PRODUCING A CONTAINER PRODUCT AND DEVICE FOR IMPLEMENTING THE METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589525
IN-SITU COMPACTION DURING Z-FIBER REINFORCEMENT OF DRY FIBER PREFORMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591083
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING DIFFRACTION GRATING AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING REPLICA GRATING
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
79%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+13.6%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1352 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