Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/814,028

SYSTEMS AND METHODS RELATED TO MODULAR RECEPTACLES

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 23, 2024
Examiner
MILLER, WILLIAM L
Art Unit
3677
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Latitude Corp.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
1362 granted / 1724 resolved
+27.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1760
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
§102
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
§112
35.6%
-4.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1724 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II, Figs. 15-17, and claims 12-20, in the reply filed on 02-19-2026 is acknowledged. The applicant has canceled non-elected claims 1-11. 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 13-20 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 claims 13, 17, and 18, line 1, “The system” lacks antecedent basis. It is noted the “The system” is also recited in line 1 of claims 14-16, 19, and 20, Claims 14-16, 19, and 20 each depend from rejected claim 13 or rejected claim 18. The following change would receive favorable consideration: Claims 13-20, line 1, change “system” to --receptacle--. In claim 20, line 3, the term “curviparallel” is unclear as it is not a standard word in the English language. 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 12, 13, 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US#5938113). Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses a receptacle 1 comprising: a cavity (interior of housing 2) at least partially enclosed by a first side wall panel 2d; and a first longitudinal bar 8 arranged inside the cavity proximate the first side wall panel extending along a first longitudinal axis (vertical axis) that is at least substantially parallel to the first side wall panel (see Fig. 2), wherein the first longitudinal bar is rotatable about the first longitudinal axis (col. 5, line 36). Regarding claim 13, further comprising a frame 2a,2b,2e,2f supporting the first side wall panel. Regarding claim 17, further comprising: an upper C-shaped first brace 16; and a lower C-shaped second brace 16, wherein a first end (upper half end portion) of the first longitudinal bar is received and journaled in a first hole (see Fig. 6) provided in the upper C-shaped brace and a second end (lower half end portion) of the first longitudinal bar is received and journaled in a second hole (see Fig. 6) provided in the lower C-shaped brace. Regarding claim 18, further comprising: a second side wall panel 2c (see view in Fig. 2) diametrically opposed across the cavity from the first side wall panel; a back wall panel 2b (see view in Fig. 2) extending substantially from a first edge of the first side wall panel to a first edge of the second side wall panel; a face plate 2a (see view in Fig. 2) extending substantially from a second edge of the first side wall panel to a second edge of the second side wall panel; and a hinged 32 door 7 capable of limiting access through the face plate into the cavity. Regarding claim 20, further comprising a top portion 2f covering the cavity, the top portion comprising a curviplanar covering sheet material and a top cut shield 3 “substantially curviparallel” to the covering sheet material as the top edge of shield 3 is substantially curved the same as the top portion (see Fig. 1). 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 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US#5938113) in view of Jones (US#5823425). Regarding claims 14-16, Kim fails to disclose the specific means of attachment between the first side wall panel 2d and the frame 2a,2b,2e,2f, and thus fails to disclose wherein the first side wall panel is secured to the frame with a tamper resistant fastener, specifically a carriage bolt extending through the first side wall panel and at least partially into the frame, wherein the carriage bolt has a domed head disposed external to the cavity. However, as evidenced by Jones, such a fastener is known in the analogous art, see col. 2, lines 42-57, and tamper resistant fastener 105, specifically a carriage bolt extending through the first side wall panel 104 and at least partially into the frame 101, wherein the carriage bolt has a domed head disposed external to the receptacle cavity (Fig. 3). Therefore, as evidenced by Jones, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim by replacing the its attachment means between the first side wall panel and the frame with a tamper resistant fastener, specifically a carriage bolt extending through the first side wall panel and at least partially into the frame, wherein the carriage bolt has a domed head disposed external to the cavity. The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that the substitution of one known element for another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (See MPEP 2143 and KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)). The substitution of a tamper resistant fastener, specifically a carriage bolt extending through the first side wall panel and at least partially into the frame, wherein the carriage bolt has a domed head disposed external to the cavity, would deter theft and damage to the receptacle. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 19 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 19, adding the pairs of longitudinal bars as claimed in detail would render the receptacle of Kim (US#5938113) inoperable by interfering with the intended operation of the support plate 4. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892. It is noted Cooper (US#5052569) teaches the use of carriage bolt fasteners 1050 in the receptacle art. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM L MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-7068. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 6:00 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, Jason San can be reached at (571) 272-6531. 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. WILLIAM L. MILLER Primary Examiner Art Unit 3677 /WILLIAM L MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 23, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600523
PACKAGING CONTAINER AND FOLDING METHODS FOR PACKAGING CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594662
HANDLE FOR HOLDING DISPENSER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594208
Environmentally Friendly and Quickly Assembled Flat Pack Coffin
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590476
BENDING PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583664
ADJUSTABLE STORAGE SYSTEMS, ADJUSTABLE STORAGE RECEPTACLES, AND METHODS OF MANUFACTURING AND USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
79%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+14.3%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1724 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