Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/811,115

TOOTHED BELT AXIS FOR PROVIDING LINEAR MOVEMENT OF A CARRIAGE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 21, 2024
Examiner
BOES, TERENCE
Art Unit
3618
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Festo SE & Co. Kg
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
534 granted / 789 resolved
+15.7% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
806
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
§102
34.1%
-5.9% vs TC avg
§112
23.6%
-16.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 789 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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 Applicant’s election without traverse of Species D (claim 6) in the reply filed on 2/6/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 3-5, 7 and 8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/6/2026. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement filed 8/21/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. The examiner notes the “Office Action issued in corresponding German Patent Application” has not been included. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1, 2, 6, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “in certain areas” rendering the claim indefinite. It is unclear as to what would constitute “certain areas”. The recitation appears idiomatic in nature. Appropriate correction is required. Regarding claims 2, 6, and 9, the phrase "in particular" appearing in each claim renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "in particular"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claim 6 recites “the first centering element and/or the second centering element” rendering the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether not the claim requires the limitations of both elements. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 2, 6, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated Vogt et al. DE 19863628329. Vogt discloses: Claim 1- a toothed belt pulley (49) and a deflection roller (48) and with a toothed belt (50), which wraps around the toothed belt pulley and the deflection roller in certain areas and is connected to the carriage (23), wherein the toothed belt pulley is rotatably received in a first bearing housing (13), which is fixed to a first axial end face of the profiled body (12) by at least one fastening means (unnumbered), wherein the carriage has a first carriage centering interface (40) and the first bearing housing has a first bearing housing centering interface (38) opposite the first carriage centering interface along the axis of movement, which are designed for a translational alignment of the first bearing housing relative to the carriage in a first spatial direction transverse to the axis of movement and for a rotational alignment of the first bearing housing relative to the carriage about the axis of movement (the device is capable of these functions). Claim 2- wherein the first carriage centering interface has a first centering element (40), and the first bearing housing centering interface has a second centering element (38), wherein at least a central axis of the first centering element and a central axis of the second centering element are aligned parallel to the axis of movement (see figure 5), in particular parallel to the axis of movement and coaxially to one another (38 and 40 are coaxial). Claim 6- wherein the first centering element (40) and/or the second centering element are designed as a recess extending along the axis of movement, wherein at least the central axis of the first centering element and the central axis of the second centering element are aligned parallel to the axis of movement, in particular parallel to the axis of movement and coaxial to one another (38 and 40 are coaxial). Claim 10- displacing a carriage (23) mounted on a profiled body (12) extending in a direction of movement along the direction of movement into a first mounting position, - positioning the first bearing housing (13), which can be fixed with at least one fastening means to an axial first end face of the profiled body, in a fastening position, - connecting a first carriage centering interface of the carriage to a first bearing housing centering interface of the first bearing housing for translational alignment of the first bearing housing relative to the carriage in a first spatial direction transverse to the axis of movement and for rotational alignment of the first bearing housing relative to the carriage about the axis of movement (see figures 1, 2, 5 and 6), wherein a central axis of a first centering element of the first carriage centering interface and a central axis of a second centering element of the first bearing housing centering interface are aligned parallel to the axis of movement (see figure 5). 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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vogt et al. DE 19863628329. Vogt discloses: Claim 9- wherein a second bearing housing (14) is fixed to a second axial end face of the profiled body (12) opposite the first axial end face with at least one fastening means (unnumbered), in which the deflection roller (48) is rotatably mounted. Vogt discloses the claimed invention except for an identical second carriage centering interface located at a distance from the first carriage centering interface along the axis of movement and that the second bearing housing has a second bearing housing centering interface opposite the second carriage centering interface along the axis of movement. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize an identical second carriage centering interface located at a distance from the first carriage centering interface along the axis of movement and that the second bearing housing has a second bearing housing centering interface opposite the second carriage centering interface along the axis of movement, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2,462,060 US 2018/0045284, and US 2016/0319919 discloses structurally similar devices. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERENCE BOES whose telephone number is (571)272-4898. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6:30. 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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at (571) 270-7778. 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. TERENCE BOES Primary Examiner Art Unit 3618 /TERENCE BOES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 21, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12571464
CAM AND HARMONIC REDUCER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12553504
STRAIN WAVE DRIVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12553505
GEARBOX
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12553501
Hydrostatic Rotating Machine with Radial Pistons and with Improved Distribution
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12540659
SCREW ACTUATORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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
89%
With Interview (+21.3%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 789 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