Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/812,665

ANTI-THEFT METHOD AND ANTI-THEFT WIRE LOCK

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Aug 22, 2024
Examiner
BARRETT, SUZANNE LALE DINO
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Shenzhen Wins Electronic Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
940 granted / 1220 resolved
+25.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
1238
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
35.5%
-4.5% vs TC avg
§102
34.9%
-5.1% vs TC avg
§112
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1220 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “the connecting points of the two ends of the conducting wire 6 are all positioned inside the lock body” of claim 7 ( It is noted that while the replacement drawing Fig. 4 now shows two contact points within the lock body (6-1), the wire 6 is not shown extending along the rope 2 from the fixed end (6-1) to reach the lock hole section at (6-1)); and the “wire 6 located between the inner and outer layers of the double-layer sleeve” (claim 13, para [00111]) (Note that Fig.4 does not show a double layer sleeve) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 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. The drawings are objected to because the wire 6 “wound back and forth many times between the two ends of the locking section in the sleeve” (para [00112]) is not shown; and the wire “mesh shape” (para [00113]) is not shown (It is noted that while the “mesh shape language is deleted from para [00113] line 3, it remains later in line 3, “intersections of the mesh”). 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. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in para [00113], line 3, “the intersections of the mesh” is not understood, since the mesh shape has been deleted; in para [00118], line 5, “by increasing positioning” is still not understood; Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-12, 14-16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The drawings fail to show the configuration and structure of a double-layer sleeve, only disclosing a single sleeve (3) in Figures 3 and 4. Accordingly, the configuration of the double-layer sleeve and the conductive wire, as discussed in the specification para [111] and the claims, is not clearly understood. 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 1-12, 14-16, 18-20 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. In claim 1, the preamble recites a method, however, in line 2, “a circuit” is recited without any method steps. Accordingly, with respect to claims 1-10, the scope of the claimed invention is not clearly understood. The claims still include indefinite phrases such as “it is judged” (in claims 1,3,4,6,9,11,16), failing to conform with current U.S. practice. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-12, 14-16, 18-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 3/13/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 112 and the objections to the drawings, reiterated above. Note that new prior art is cited showing various configurations of insulating sleeves on conductive wires for locks, also note insulating sleeves of previously cited Morstein 5,836,002 and EP 1657387. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUZANNE DINO BARRETT whose telephone number is (571)272-7053. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8AM-6:30PM. 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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. 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. SUZANNE DINO BARRETT Primary Examiner Art Unit 3675B Sdb /SUZANNE L BARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 22, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Feb 13, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 13, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 02, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595688
SECURE, REMOTELY CONTROLLED, INTERNALLY POWERED PADLOCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584512
UNIVERSAL FASTENING LOCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12559973
PLUG FOR LOCK SYSTEM AND ASSOCIATED METHOD OF ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12553258
LATCH ASSEMBLY AND METHOD OF INSTALLING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12546565
Restroom Stall Firearm Receptacle
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+8.2%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1220 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