Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 06, 2026
Application No. 18/796,315

TECHNIQUES FOR PRODUCING SHREDS FROM A FOOD RIBBON

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 07, 2024
Priority
Aug 24, 2023 — DE 10 2023 122 764.5
Examiner
FLORES SANCHEZ, OMAR
Art Unit
4100
Tech Center
4100
Assignee
Hochland SE
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
1278 granted / 1730 resolved
+13.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
1742
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
41.1%
+1.1% vs TC avg
§102
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
§112
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1730 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Drawings The drawings are objected to because the outer side of the track has not been identified by a number. 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 § 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) 1-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1 as being disclosed by Owens (2020/0051842). Owens discloses the invention including: Claim 1; a first motor unit 50; a guide track 34 or 36 (see Fig. 3 and 6) which is driven in a direction of rotation by the first motor unit; a first knife portion 42 which is arranged on an outer side (is defined in the space in the direction of the other track 32) of the guide track, the first knife portion comprising a first blade structure with first elevations and first depressions (see para. 0052) which are transverse to the direction of rotation of the guide track; and a second knife portion 42 which is also arranged on the outer side of the guide track, the second knife portion comprising a second blade structure with second elevations and second depressions (see para. 0052) which are traverse to the direction of rotation of the guide track, wherein, the second knife portion is arranged offset to the first knife portion in the direction of rotation of the guide track, and the second knife portion is arranged offset (see para. 0052) transversely to the direction of rotation of the guide track so that at least one of the first elevations virtually engages in at least one of the second depressions and at least one of the second elevations virtually engages in at least one of the first depressions (see para. 0052, every adjacent blade 42 has the teeth of the blades 42 offset by the distance D1 (for FIG. 7) or D4 (for FIG. 5)). That is, the peak of one blade will coincide with the valley of an adjacent blade). Claim 2; wherein the first knife portion and the second knife portion are each attached at a distance from the guide track so as to form a slot (see Fig. 3) between the guide track and the first knife portion and the second knife portion. Claim 3; the guide track is a cylindrical body or a wheel (see Fig. 5), and the cylindrical body or the wheel comprises cavities (see Fig. 4) for at least one of receiving and dispensing the shreds. Claim 4; wherein the first elevations and the first depressions of the first knife portion and the second elevations and the second depressions of the second knife portion each have a same geometric structure (see Fig. 4 and 7-8). Claim 5; wherein the same geometric structure of the first knife portion and of the second knife portion is that the first elevations of the first knife portion and the second depressions of the second knife portion are formed as negatives relative to one another, and that the first depressions of the first knife portion and the second elevations of the second knife portion are formed as negatives relative to one another (see para. 0052, every adjacent blade 42 has the teeth of the blades 42 offset by the distance D1 (for FIG. 7) or D4 (for FIG. 5)). Claim 6; a feed module (see Fig. 2) which is configured to feed the food ribbon to the cutting apparatus continuously in a transport direction via a feed belt 74. Claim 7; a second motor 73A which is configured to drive the feed module. Claim 8; wherein the feed module is further configured to feed the food ribbon to an outer side of the cutting apparatus (see Fig. 3). Claim 9; wherein a cutting angle of the food ribbon can be flexibly adjusted (see para. 0032 and 0060). Claim 11; providing the cutting apparatus (see Fig. 1) as recited in claim 1; and feeding a food ribbon to the cutting apparatus (see Fig. 3), wherein, the first knife portion first cuts out shreds from the food ribbon so as to form third elevations and third depressions on a surface of the food ribbon, and thereafter, the second knife portion cuts shreds out of the food ribbon via the second elevations cutting the third elevations out of the food ribbon (see para. 0052, every adjacent blade 42 has the teeth of the blades 42 offset by the distance D1 (for FIG. 7) or D4 (for FIG. 5)). 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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owens (2020/0051842) in view of Fager et al. (5,573,805). Owens discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for a counter-knife which is attached downstream of the feed belt in the transport direction. However, Fager et al. teaches the use of a counter-knife which is attached downstream of the feed belt in the transport direction for the purpose of better supporting the cheese ribbons during cutting. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the device of Owens by providing the above missing limitation as taught by Fager et al. in order to obtain a device that better support the cheese ribbons during cutting. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR FLORES SANCHEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4507. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday8:00-4:00 pm. 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, Adam Eiseman can be reached at 571-270-3818. 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. /OMAR FLORES SANCHEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 07, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12691541
ELECTRIC CUTTING TOOL
3y 8m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12691600
MODULAR PERSONAL CARE IMPLEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12690516
HEAD FOR BRUSH CUTTERS
2y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12691601
RAZOR BLADE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
1y 10m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12669793
PRECISION-CUT CASING TUBULAR FOR CENTRALIZER ASSEMBLY
3y 4m to grant Granted Jun 30, 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
74%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+14.3%)
2y 10m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1730 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