Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/849,244

SUSPENSION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112§DP
Filed
Sep 20, 2024
Examiner
FRISBY, KEITH J
Art Unit
3614
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Bae Systems PLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
783 granted / 1011 resolved
+25.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +1% lift
Without
With
+0.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1032
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§103
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§102
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
§112
29.5%
-10.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1011 resolved cases

Office Action

§112 §DP
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 Group I in the reply filed on December 19, 2025 is acknowledged. Original claims 11 and 12 were withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on December 19, 2025. Claims 19 is directed to an allowable product. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 821.04(b), claims 11 and 12, directed to the process of making or using the allowable product, previously withdrawn from consideration as a result of a restriction requirement, are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104, since claims 11 and 12 were amended to include all of the limitations of allowable product claim 19. Because a claimed invention previously withdrawn from consideration under 37 CFR 1.142 has been rejoined, the restriction requirement between groups I and II as set forth in the Office action mailed on October 22, 2025 is hereby withdrawn. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement as to the rejoined inventions, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 400, 250-1, 250-2, 450-1, 450-2, 700, 702. 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. 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 leader line for the reference character 416 in Fig. 3 should extend to the wheel mounting member, not to the wheel mount pivoting axis 432. 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 abstract of the disclosure is objected to because (i) in line 9, “are provided” should be changed to --is provided--; and (ii) “[Figure 7]” should be deleted at the end of the abstract. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 1, line 28, “system” should be changed to --a system--. On page 1, line 29, “and” should be deleted. On page 5, line 30, “having” should be deleted. On page 8, line 24, “may” should be changed to --may be--. On page 9, line 28, “446” should be changed to --446 is--. On page 11, line 25, “the around” should be changed to --around--. On page 13, line 23, “they” should be changed to --that--. On page 14, line 11, “about” should be changed to --above--. On page 15, line 2, “702” should be changed to --702 is--. On page 15, line 14, “relative” should be changed to --relative to--. On page 15, line 23, “solution” should be changed to --solutions--. On page 15, line 26, “in which in which” should be changed to --in which--. On page 15, line 28, “direction or” should be changed to --direction of--. On page 15, line 31, “arms” should be changed to --arm--. On page 16, line 33, “on” should be changed to --one--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, “system” should be changed to --system of--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, “system” should be changed to --system of--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: In lines 5 and 7 (two places), “relative the” should be changed to --relative to the--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, “having” should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, “system” should be changed to --system of--, and in lines 4-5, “relative the” should be changed to --relative to the--. Appropriate correction is required. 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 14 and 15 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. Claims 14 and 15 suffer from double inclusion, since they can be read to include the same element multiple times (i.e., “a chassis mounting member” is recited in claim 1, lines 5-6, “a wheel arm chassis mounting member” is recited in claim 14, line 2, “wheel arm chassis mounts” are recited in claim 14, line 5, and “the wheel arm chassis mounting member” is recited in claim 15, line 2, all of said recitations being drawn to the same element(s) (i.e., 414)). MPEP §2173.05(o). As explained in MPEP §608.01(o), “The use of a confusing variety of terms for the same thing should not be permitted.” This rejection could be overcome by changing: (i) “a wheel arm” to --the-- in claim 14, line 2; (ii) “wheel arm chassis mounts” to --chassis mounting members-- in claim 14, line 5; and (iii) “the wheel arm chassis mounting member” to --the chassis mounting members-- in claim 15, line 2. Claim 15 recites the limitation "the wheel arms" in line 3 and “the other wheel arms” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim, since only a single wheel arm is previously recited. Claim 15 recites the limitations "the suspension units" in line 2 and “another suspension units” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim, since only a single suspension unit is previously recited. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-13 and 16-20 are allowed. Claims 14 and 15 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: The cited prior art does not teach the claimed invention. For example, Grant et al. (WO 00/32462) does not teach at least a chassis end trunnion and a wheel end trunnion as recited in claims 1, 11 and 19. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH J FRISBY whose telephone number is (571)270-7802. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM - 5:00PM. 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 Shanske can be reached at (571)270-5985. 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. /KEITH J FRISBY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 20, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Mar 24, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 06, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594802
MOTOR VEHICLE WITH MULTI-MODE EXTREME TRAVEL SUSPENSION-SUSPENSION HYDRAULIC DESIGN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583722
Stability System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583413
THREE-DIMENSIONAL AIR BAG
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579918
COVER FINISH ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578063
A vehicle with a cryogenic container and efficient routing of the connection line
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
77%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+0.6%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1011 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