Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 17, 2026
Application No. 18/848,847

OPERATING MECHANISM AND SWITCHING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Sep 19, 2024
Priority
Jun 14, 2022 — CN 202210668596.7 +1 more
Examiner
JIMENEZ, ANTHONY R
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Chint Low Voltage Electrical Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
975 granted / 1106 resolved
+28.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1122
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
43.1%
+3.1% vs TC avg
§102
28.6%
-11.4% vs TC avg
§112
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1106 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 . Claims 1-15 are pending in the current application. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding p. 4, line 11, perhaps the term “driving” should be changed to “a driving.” Regarding p. 4, line 22, perhaps the term “driving” should be changed to “a driving.” Regarding p. 5, the 2nd to the last line, perhaps the term “rotate” should be changed to “to rotate.” Regarding p. 6, 15th to the last line, the language “the said” should be changed to “the” or “said.” Regarding p. 8, lines 10-11, it appears that the sentence beginning with language “The operating” is incomplete. Regarding p. 12, line 2, perhaps the term “driving” should be changed to “a driving.” Regarding p. 15, line 25, the language “opening direction each other” is not clear. Additionally, the paragraphs of the specification, other than in the claims or abstract, may be numbered at the time the application is filed, and should be individually and consecutively numbered using Arabic numerals, so as to unambiguously identify each paragraph. Drawings The drawings are objected to because view numbers must be larger than the numbers used for reference characters. See 37 C.F.R. 1.84(u)(2). Additionally, C1 discussed at p. 15, line 24, and C2 discussed at p. 15, line 40, do not appear in the drawings. See 37 C.F.R. 1.84(p)(5). 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, 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. Claim Objections Claim 1, line 10: perhaps the language “release energy” should be changed to “release the energy.” Claim 1, line 11: perhaps the language “releases” should be changed to “releases the.” Claim 1, line 16: perhaps the term “both” should be changed to “two.” Claim 1, line 19: perhaps the term “first” should be deleted. Claim 1, line 19: perhaps the language “release” should be changed to “release the.” Claim 1, line 22: it appears that the term “the” should be changed to “a.” Regarding Claim 11, the 2nd to the last line, perhaps the language “the same” should be changed to “a same.” Claim 14, line 8: it appears that the term “for” should be changed to “for a.” 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. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Specifically, Claim 1 is rejected since it is not clear what is meant by the language “output shaft structure” recited in line 12. Such a structure does not appear to be defined in the Specification. Regarding Claim 1, the 5th to the last line, it is not clear how the “output shaft structure” crosses over the “breaking transition position.” Such a position is not illustrated in the drawings. Regarding Claim 11, the last line, it is not clear if the “first critical position” is the same as or different from that recited in the 4th to the last line. Regarding Claim 12, line 4, it is not clear what is meant by the language “frame-shaped structure.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Chen et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 7,696,447 B2) discloses a stored energy assembly for an electrical switching apparatus, but does not disclose the claimed transmission plate. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY R. JIMENEZ whose telephone number is 313-446-6518. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 10:30 am – 9 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, Renee Luebke, can be reached at (571) 272-2009. 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. /ANTHONY R JIMENEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 19, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12738430
MOVABLE UNIT, SWITCHOVER SWITCH, AND PRODUCTION METHOD FOR THE SWITCHOVER SWITCH
2y 3m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12725744
OPERATION APPARATUS FOR ROTARY SWITCH AND ROTARY SWITCH
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12725742
SWITCH DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12712136
ON-LOAD TAP CHANGER AND TAP-CHANGING TRANSFORMER HAVING AN ON-LOAD TAP CHANGER
4y 3m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12712138
DEVICE FOR REMOTELY ZEROIZING AN ADVANCED GROUND-AIR RADIO
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+7.0%)
2y 2m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1106 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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