Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/806,029

SPRING PORTABLE DECORATIVE BOX AND FOLDABLE SUPPORTING COLUMN

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 15, 2024
Examiner
THOMAS, KAREEN KAY
Art Unit
3736
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Linhai Yinhe Electric Lamp Company
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
1015 granted / 1323 resolved
+6.7% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
1353
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§102
37.4%
-2.6% vs TC avg
§112
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1323 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 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. Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sortwell (US5,897,012), in view of Engineering Skills. (https://www.engineeringskills.com/posts/column-buckling-structures-and-stability). 1. Sortwell teaches A portable decorative box (Figs 6), comprising two frame bodies (top and base of the box) arranged up and down, a plurality of foldable supporting columns (30) being arranged between the two frame bodies, the frame bodies and the supporting columns forming a stereoscopic supporting skeleton of the decorative box (Fig. 6), and a lock structure (71) being arranged between the two frame bodies. Sortwell DIFFERS in that it does not disclose the box is a spring box and the supporting column comprises two connecting rods and a spiral spring fixedly connected between the two connecting rods, the two connecting rods are both located on an axis of the spiral spring to make the two connecting rods and the spiral spring form a straight line, a pitch of a middle part of the spiral spring is smaller than pitches of two ends; and when the two frame bodies approach to form a folded state and the lock structure above is locked, the supporting column is bent at the middle part of the spiral spring, and when the lock structure is unlocked, the supporting column is capable of resetting to a straight state under an action of the spiral spring. Attention, however is directed to Engineering skills which discloses two columns can be connected by a spring. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify Sortwell, by employing such a column, in order to employ an alternative collapsible method that is good for its fast assembly if desired. *This modification would allow the above “DIFFERS” function and structure to be meet*. 2. The spring portable decorative box according to claim 1, wherein the middle part of the spiral spring is located between end surfaces of the two connecting rods, end parts of the two connecting rods are provided with a groove, and a part of the spiral spring with a larger pitch is clamped with the groove (see Sortwell in view of Engineering Skills). 3. The spring portable decorative box according to claim 2, wherein upper and lower ends of the supporting column are respectively hinged with the two frame bodies above, the upper and lower ends of the supporting column are both provided with a blocking surface located on an outer side and an arc surface located on an inner side, and the blocking surface is capable of abutting against the frame body (see Sortwell in view of Engineering Skills). 4. The spring portable decorative box according to claim 1, wherein hinging parts are symmetrically arranged on the frame body left and right, a cross beam is arranged between two supporting columns, and the supporting columns are hinged with the hinging part through the cross beam (see Sortwell in view of Engineering Skills). Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Engineering skills (https://www.engineeringskills.com/posts/column-buckling-structures-and-stability). 8. A foldable supporting column (in the below Fig), comprising: two connecting rods (in the below Fig); and a spiral spring (in the below Fig at “rotational spring”) fixedly connected between the two connecting rods, wherein the two connecting rods are both located on an axis of the spiral spring to make the two connecting rods and the spiral spring form a straight line (in the below Fig). The reference DIFFERS in that it does not disclose a pitch of a middle part of the spiral spring is smaller than pitches of two ends. However such springs are old and well known, therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify the reference, by employing such a spring, in order to change the flexibility of the spring, as desired for the collapsibility of the rods. 9. The foldable supporting column according to claim 8, wherein the middle part of the spiral spring is located between end surfaces of the two connecting rods, end parts of the two connecting rods are provided with a groove, and a part of the spiral spring with a larger pitch is clamped with the groove (see Figs). 10. The foldable supporting column according to claim 9, wherein upper and lower ends of the supporting column are respectively provided with a blocking surface and an arc surface, and the supporting column is folded towards the arc surface (see Figs). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-7 are 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. PNG media_image1.png 720 718 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 704 498 media_image2.png Greyscale Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAREEN KAY THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)270-5611. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm. 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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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. /KAREEN K THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 15, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 03, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600561
Fluid Storage Tank Including a Flexible Bladder Supported on a Collapsible Rigid Frame
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600562
Waste Bin Arrangement
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600556
INSULATING CONTAINER FOR TAKEAWAY PIZZA
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600530
CAP
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589915
DISPENSING TAP EQUIPPED WITH FLEXIBLE INTERNAL VALVE
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
77%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+17.1%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1323 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