Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/864,180

HOOP LOCK WITH WELDED-ON ARMORING

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 08, 2024
Examiner
BOSWELL, CHRISTOPHER J
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Abus August Bremicker Sõhne Kg
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
755 granted / 1129 resolved
+14.9% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1166
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
§102
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§112
13.4%
-26.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1129 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim(s) 1-3, 5-13 and 15-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by World Patent Application Number 2020/056289 to Cato et al. Cato et al. disclose a hoop lock (9) comprising: a lock body that comprises a housing (27) and a locking apparatus (16) accommodated in the housing (figure 6); and a closing hoop (10) that has at least one end (17) that is selectively locked to the lock body or released from the lock body by way means of the locking apparatus (figure 6), wherein an armoring is applied to at least one of the closing hoop (via 1) and the housing (via 28) of the lock body by way of buildup welding (6), as in claim 1. Cato et al. also disclose the armoring comprises a hard metal (paragraph 28), as in claim 2, and the armoring is formed in the form of at least one armor bead (6), as in claim 3, wherein the armor bead extends over at least approximately the total length of the housing and/or over at least approximately the total length of the closing hoop (figure 2), as in claim 5, as well as the armor bead is a continuous armor bead (figure 2), as in claim 6, and where the armor bead is formed by a plurality of segments (7, 8) spaced apart from one another, as in claim 15. Cato et al. further disclose the armoring is formed at at least one of a side surface and of the housing (figures 2 and 3 show the placement of the armoring), as in claim 7, wherein the armoring is formed at an outer side surface of the housing (shown in figures 6 and 7), as in claim 17, as well as the armoring is formed at an outer edge of the housing (shown in figures 6 and 7), as in claim 18, and wherein the armoring is formed centrally at at least one side surface of the housing, at at least one side surface of the housing offset from its center, in the region of at least one edge of the housing, and/or partly or completely at at least one edge of the housing (shown in figures 6 and 7), as in claim 8. Cato et al. additionally disclose at least two side surfaces of the housing and/or at least two side surfaces of the closing hoop are provided with an armoring (shown in figures 6 and 7), as in claim 9, wherein at least two oppositely disposed side surfaces of the housing are provided with an armoring (figures 2 and 7), as in claim 21, and the armoring is formed in a depression (joints in 27) provided at a side surface of the housing (figure 7), as in claim 10, as well as the closing hoop is formed by a plurality of jointed bars (1, 10, 32-34) connected to one another in an articulated manner and the armoring is formed at at least one of the jointed bars (figure 6), as in claim 11, wherein the armoring is formed at a narrow side of the jointed bar (figure 2), as in claim 12, as well as the armoring is formed in a depression (junction of 7 and 8) provided at a side surface of the jointed bar (figure 2), as in claim 13. Cato et al. also disclose the armoring is formed at at least one of a side surface and an edge of the closing hoop (figures 2 and 3), as in claim 16, wherein the armoring is formed at an outer side surface of the closing hoop (figures 2 and 3), as in claim 19, and the armoring is formed at an outer edge of the closing hoop (figures 2 and 3), as in claim 20. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim(s) 4 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over to Cato et al., as applied above. Cato et al. disclose the invention substantially as claimed. However, Cato et al. do not disclose the thickness of the bead. It is common knowledge in the prior art to utilize a weld bead strong enough to secure desired components in the same field of endeavor for the purpose of strengthening the armor of the hoop lock. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize a bead having a width between 5 and 10 mm, and a thickness between 0.5 and 5 mm in order to provide a reinforced connection between the associated components. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following patents are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to armored padlock assemblies: U.S. Patent Number 12,428,876 to Cato et al.; U.S. Patent Number 9,890,561 to Perrenoud et al.; U.S. Patent Number 9,512,640 to Kyllonen et al.; U.S. Patent Number 4,561,272 to Goldstein et al.; U.S. Patent Number 3,976,434 to Shwayder; U.S. Patent Number 3,453,846 to Owen et al.; U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0344367 to Abrahams; U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0011332 to Kemper et al.; U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2005/0092038 to Becker et al.; U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2004/0093914 to Vito. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER J BOSWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-7054. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 9-4; F 9-12. 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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at 571-272-7376. 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. /CHRISTOPHER J BOSWELL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675 CJB /cb/ January 6, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 08, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12577827
SAFE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577809
LOCK APPARATUSES WITH SECONDARY LOCKING MECHANISMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577810
DISPENSER LOCKING ASSEMBLIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577805
LOCK ASSEMBLY AND METHOD OF INSTALLING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577812
SECURITY TAG HOLDER
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
67%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+26.7%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1129 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