Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/805,850

Modular Stairs

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 15, 2024
Examiner
KWIECINSKI, RYAN D
Art Unit
3635
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Samuel A Merriam
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
772 granted / 1133 resolved
+16.1% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
1183
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
39.7%
-0.3% vs TC avg
§102
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§112
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1133 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Claim Objections Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3, line 2, “or” appears it should be –3--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,256,946 B1 to Kennedy et al. in view of AU 2017201385 A1 to Edwards et al. Regarding claim 1, Kennedy et al. disclose a modular adjustable stairway (Fig.3) comprising: a first stringer (left 70) and a second stringer (right 70); the first stringer and the second stringer configured to be coupled to either side of one or more steps (58); the first stringer and second stringer having open ends (top and bottom, open profile). Kennedy et al. disclose tubular stringers but do not disclose two or more stair segments having stringers into which a splice bar is insertable, the splice bar adapted to connect the first stringer and the second stringer of one of the two or more stair segments to the first stringer and the second stringer of another stair segment from the two or more stair segments. Edwards et al. disclose two or more stair segments (3, 3, 3, Fig.1) having stringers (members 3 on each sides of the steps, Fig.1) into which a splice bar (5) is insertable, the splice bar adapted to connect the first stringer and the second stringer of one of the two or more stair segments to the first stringer and the second stringer of another stair segment from the two or more stair segments (Fig.1a, b, c). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have formed the stringers of the stairway of Kennedy with multiple segments and splice bars are taught by Edwards et al. to enable the stairway to be adjusted in length for different angles and different uses. Smaller segments also allow the parts of the stairway to be more easily manufactured, transported, and assembled. Regarding claim 2, Kennedy et al. disclose the first stringer and second stringer each including an upper stringer extrusion (top 70, Fig.10) and a lower stringer extrusion (bottom 70, Fig.10). Regarding claim 3, Kennedy et al. disclose each of the upper stringer extrusions and the lower stringer extrusions approximately in the shape or a rectangular prism (70, Fig.7) or cuboid, and including two ends that are open (top and bottom of 70), an inner side (inside surface of 70, facing steps), an outer side (outside surface of 70), a top side (top of each 70) and a bottom side (bottom of each 70), the inner side and the outer side each having a plurality of openings (openings into which the fasteners for the steps are inserted, Fig.10) that are configured to facilitate a connection to the one or more steps. Regarding claim 4, Kennedy et al. disclose the one or more steps each having a first side and a second side (left and right side 58), Kennedy et al. discloses wherein each of the first side and the second side include threaded receivers (76, Fig.6; 91, Fig.7) and mechanical fasteners (82 and 90) that extend out and away from the step and that are configured to extend through the openings of the inner side and the outer side of a respective stringer (Fig.5 and Fig.7). Although one may interpret the mechanical fasteners as being threaded rods extending out from the steps, Kennedy et al. do not specifically disclose wherein the steps include threaded rods extending out and away from the step. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided threaded rods to the steps of Kennedy et al. in order to provide an effective means of securing the steps between the stringers without the stringers becoming dislodged if the mechanical fasteners are removed, thereby ensuring that the steps remain in place. Regarding claim 5, Although Kennedy et al. does not specifically disclose the threaded rods, Kennedy et al. do in fact disclose welding the receivers to the steps (Page 7, lines 42-45). Regarding claim 6, Kennedy et al. disclose the modular adjustable stairway further including an upper end and lower end (Fig.10), and wherein each of the upper end and the lower end include support posts (104, 73, Fig.10). Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,256,946 B1 to Kennedy et al. in view of AU 2017201385 A1 to Edwards et al. in view of GB 2426029 A to Howlett. Regarding claim 7, Kennedy discloses the support post further including a bracket (132, 134, Fig.11) that connects to the upper stringer extrusion and the lower stringer extrusion (82, 82, Fig.11), and a post (104) that supports the modular adjustable stairway above a surface. Kennedy also discloses sockets in a different embodiment (112, Fig.14). Kennedy does not disclose wherein the top and bottom posts have brackets secured to the stringers. Kennedy also does not disclose wherein the post extends through the bracket. Howlett discloses wherein the posts extend through the brackets in the stairway (Fig. 8 and 11). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have secured posts to both the top and bottom of the stairway and allowing the posts to be secured to the stringers and to extend through the brackets as taught by Howlett so to ensure the posts are secured to the stringer and put the weight and forces onto the stringers and not the steps themselves, and further to enable the posts to also support railings of the stairway. Regarding claim 8, Kennedy et al. disclose wherein the support posts are configured to be secured at different elevations (secured on pins 82 which are located on each step) and where the different elevations result in the modular adjustable stairway having a different slope (Fig.13). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D KWIECINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday from 8:30 am to 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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 272-3238. 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. RDK /RYAN D KWIECINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 15, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599788
Rope Grab
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601182
DECORATIVE QUOIN INSTALLATION AND ILLUMINATION SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600278
VEHICLE SEAT FLOOR FILLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594861
ADJUSTMENT DEVICE AND VEHICLE SEAT WITH ADJUSTMENT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589045
WALL MOUNT FOR MOUNTING A MEDICAL DEVICE
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
68%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+19.6%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1133 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