Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/813,290

DOOR WITH REPLACEABLE PANEL

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 23, 2024
Examiner
MENEZES, MARCUS
Art Unit
3634
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
630 granted / 895 resolved
+18.4% vs TC avg
Strong +52% interview lift
Without
With
+52.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
927
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
40.7%
+0.7% vs TC avg
§102
19.5%
-20.5% vs TC avg
§112
32.4%
-7.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 895 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION This non-final Office action is in response to the claims filed on February 13, 2026. Status of claims: claims 3, 8, 10, 13, 16, 17, 19 and 22 are cancelled; claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 18, 20, 21 and 23 are hereby examined below. 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 13, 2026 has been entered. Claim Objections Claims 1, 2, 4, 9, 11, 12, 14 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1, 14 and 20 – the term “major” in “major face” is odd and perhaps should be replaced. Claims 1 and 14 – “first latch extending a fixed distance” is odd since a latch usually includes a bolt that slides, which is not the case here. Perhaps latch should be replaced. Claim 1, lines 10,13 – which panel is being referenced by “the panel” Claim 2 - which panel is being referenced by “the panel” Claim 4 - which panel is being referenced by “the panel” Claim 9 – which panel is being referenced by “the panel” Claim 11 – which panel is being referenced by “the panel” Claim 12 – which panel is being referenced by “the panel” 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. Claims 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 679855 to Mockridge in view of US 5083398 to Kolbeck et al. (hereinafter “Kolbeck”). Mockridge discloses a door system, comprising: a door A having a pocket (housing element B; see FIGS. 1 and 5) in a major face thereof, the pocket having an interior surface with a first receptacle 31 extending into the interior surface on a first side of the pocket and a second receptacle 29 extending into the interior surface of on a second side of the pocket; and a panel (see annotated figure below) configured to be selectively positioned within the pocket and connected to the door, the panel comprising a first latch 40 extending a fixed distance from a first side of the panel and configured to be received within the first receptacle and a second latch 42 that is configured to extend a variable distance from a second side of the panel and be received within the second receptacle. (see FIGS. 1 and 5) Mockridge fails to disclose the door further comprises a channel that has a first opening in an exterior side surface of the door and a second opening that opens into the second receptacle, the channel being configured to receive a rod or key in the first opening and that is configured to extend into the second receptacle through the second opening, wherein the rod or key is configured to extend into the second receptacle to move the second latch from an extending position to a retracted position. Kolbeck teaches of a panel system with a channel that has a first opening in an exterior side surface of a panel and a second opening that opens into a second receptacle, the channel being configured to receive a rod or key 120,70 (note: tool that reaches through the first opening and engages with elements 120,70 is considered part of the key) in the first opening and that is configured to extend into the second receptacle through the second opening, (see annotated FIG. 7 below) wherein the rod or key is configured to extend into the second receptacle to move a latch 43 from an extending position to a retracted position. (see FIGS. 6 and 7) Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to remove element 45 on the Mockridge second latch and modify the Mockridge element 20 with a channel with a first and second opening, as taught by Kolbeck with a reasonable expectation of success in order to allow for locking of the panel in a closed position. (claim 14) Mockridge, as applied above, further discloses wherein the panel as opposing first and second faces, (on each side of the panel; see FIG. 3) the panel being selectively connectable to the door with either the first face or the second face being visible. (see FIG. 1) (claim 18) [AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (panel)] PNG media_image1.png 358 440 media_image1.png Greyscale [AltContent: textbox (Second receptacle (occupied by a portion of the tool))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Second opening)][AltContent: textbox (First opening)][AltContent: textbox (channel)][AltContent: arrow] PNG media_image2.png 354 460 media_image2.png Greyscale Claim 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mockridge in view of Kolbeck, as applied to claim 14 above, in view of Hoffman. Mockridge, as applied above, fails to disclose an ejection feature. Hoffman teaches of a panel comprising an ejection feature 1 (see FIGS. 1-7) configured to facilitate movement of a panel 19. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the retaining frame or panel disclosed in Mockridge with the ejection feature taught in Hoffman with a reasonable expectation of success in order to assist with movement and removal of the retaining frame and/or panel. (claim 15) 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. Claims 20, 21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2019/0257142 to Koehl et al. (hereinafter “Koehl”). Koehl discloses a door system, comprising: a door 100 having opposing first and second stiles 103,104 that at least partially define a pocket 109a in a major face of the door, the first stile having a first exterior surface, a first interior surface, and at least one channel 116 that extends between and opens to the first exterior surface and the first interior surface; (see FIGS. 1 and 4; see portion of FIG. 4 below) a panel or frame 109,150 sized and configured to be positioned within the pocket, the panel or frame having at least one channel therein, the at least one channel of the panel or frame being aligned with the at least one channel of the first stile when the panel or frame is positioned within the pocket; and at least one rod 122 that is configured to be inserted, from the first exterior surface of the first stile, into the aligned channels to secure the panel or frame in the pocket. (claim 20) Koehl further discloses wherein the at least one channel in the panel or frame extends through the panel or frame from a first side to a second side. (see FIG. 4) (claim 21) Koehl further discloses wherein the second stile comprises at least one secondary channel therein, the at least one secondary channel being aligned with the at least one channel of the first stile and the at least one channel of the panel or frame when the panel or frame is positioned within the pocket, and the at least one rod being configured to extend through the at least one channel in the first stile, the at least one channel in the panel or frame, and into the at least one secondary channel in the second stile to secure the panel or frame to the door.(see annotated FIG. 4 below) (claim 23) [AltContent: textbox (Secondary channel )] [AltContent: textbox (First exterior surface)][AltContent: arrow] [AltContent: textbox (First interior surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow] PNG media_image3.png 238 528 media_image3.png Greyscale Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9, 11 and 12 are allowed. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed February 13, 2026 regarding claim 20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. More specifically, on page 9 of the applicant’s response filed February 13, 2026, the applicant states “Koehl does not disclose that the module trays 150 have channels therein that receive the rods 122 to secure the module trays 150 to the door.” It appears the applicant did not consider all the elements of the Koehl panel 109,150, as noted in the rejection. Put another way, since element 109 has been interpreted as being part of the panel 109,150 and element 109 includes “at least one channel therein, the at least one channel of the panel or frame being aligned with the at least one channel of the first stile when the panel of frame is positioned within the pocket,” (see FIG. 4 and [0095]) as recited in claim 20, the examiner respectfully maintains the rejection of claim 20. Note: a new grounds of rejection has been made for claim 14. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCUS MENEZES whose telephone number is (571)272-5225. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 7:30 -4 PST. 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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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. /MARCUS MENEZES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 23, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 04, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Feb 13, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 11, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12571242
Device for closing an opening provided in the body of a vehicle equipped with an end fitting forming a mechanical stop for a sliding shuttle, and corresponding vehicle
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12553280
PET DOOR ASEMBLY AND FLAP
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12545084
VEHICULAR REAR SLIDER WINDOW ASSEMBLY WITH SLIDER BEARING TRACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12529253
Weight Compensation For Vertically Movable Façade Components
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12509936
HYBRID DRIVE-THRU AUTOMATIC TOUCHLESS DOOR SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
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
70%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+52.4%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 895 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month