Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/885,224

PORTABLE ARTICLE INCLUDING A NUMBER OF PATTERNS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Sep 13, 2024
Priority
Dec 18, 2017 — provisional 62/599,852 +1 more
Examiner
SOHN, SEUNG C
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Revolution Cycle Works Company
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allowance Rate
719 granted / 826 resolved
+27.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
840
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
33.3%
-6.7% vs TC avg
§102
54.0%
+14.0% vs TC avg
§112
3.8%
-36.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 826 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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 1-22 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. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the motion" in line 1 and “the visible light imaging system” in lines 11-13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Regarding claim 1, it is not clear and confusing that “a portable body” in lines 3-4 is the same portable body in line 1. Claims 2-11 are also rejected based on their dependencies from the rejected independent claim 1. Claim 12 recites the limitation "the motion" in line 1 and “the path of travel” in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Regarding claim 1, it is not clear and confusing that “a portable body” in line 4 is the same portable body in line 1. Claims 13-22 are also rejected based on their dependencies from the rejected independent claim 12. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Auer et al. (Patent Pub. No. DE 102009021851 A1). Regarding claims 1 and 12, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 a system for predicting the motion of a portable body, the system comprising: a visible light imaging system (4, i.e., radar locating device) in motion; a portable body (2, i.e., object) in motion; and a visible light detectable orienting pattern (1, i.e., radar reflecting reflector) disposed on the portable body and fixed with respect to the path of travel of the portable body relative to the visible light imaging system; wherein the visible light imaging system (4) is configured to detect the visible light detectable orienting pattern (1), determine at least one characteristic of the portable body relative to the visible light imaging system, and predict the path of travel (forward) of the portable body with respect to the visible light imaging system ([0019] – [0021]). Regarding claim 2 and 13, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 the method of claim 1 and the system of claim 12 wherein the at least one characteristic is selected from the group consisting of orientation, position, velocity, distance, direction, and speed (since the definition of radar is a system for detecting the presence, direction, distance, and speed of aircraft, ships, and other objects, by sending out pulses of radio waves which are reflected off the object back to the source). Regarding claims 3 and 14, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 the method of claim 1 and the system of claim 12 wherein the visible light imaging system is located on a vehicle (5) or a robot ([0020]). Regarding claims 4 and 15, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 the method of claim 1 and the system of claim 12 wherein the visible light detectable orienting pattern (1) includes elements (7) representing two Cartesian coordinate axes ([0027]). Regarding claims 5 and 16, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 the method of claim 1 and the system of claim 12 wherein the portable body comprises apparel (jacket or trousers) or an accessory and the visible light detectable orienting pattern is located at a productive location on the portable body ([0019]). Regarding claims 6 and 17, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 the method of claim 1 and the system of claim 12 wherein the portable body (1) inherently includes a sonar material (since sound and/or pulses can be reflected by any object including the reflector.). Regarding claims 7 and 18, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 the method of claim 1 and the system of claim 12 wherein the portable body comprises one or more additional patterns selected from the group consisting of public patterns, detectable patterns, radar enhancing patterns, visible patterns, embedded patterns, camouflage patterns, invisible patterns, orienting patterns, external patterns, internal patterns, applied patterns, a handshake pattern, and three-dimensional patterns. Regarding claims 8 and 19, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 the method of claim 7 and the system of claim 18 wherein one of the additional patterns is an enhanced three-dimensional pattern and/or a LIDAR detectable pattern (since the reflector reflects any light including laser (radio waves)). Regarding claims 9 and 20, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 the method of claim 7 and the system of claim 18 wherein one of the additional patterns is a radar detectable pattern ([0019]). Regarding claims 10 and 21, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 the method of claim 9 and the system of claim 20 wherein the radar detectable pattern includes a material selected from the group consisting of a retroreflective material, reflective beads, and a metallic thread ([0024] – [0025]). Regarding claims 11 and 22, Auer et al. shows in Figs. 1-2 the method of claim 9 and the system of claim 20 wherein the radar detectable pattern (1) is configured to be selectably actuated (by reflecting only when the radar locating device is present). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Cauwood et al. (Patent Pub. No. US 2018/0166006 A1) discloses that based on the detection of the landing or push-off of the foot during the running motion, the controller can predict the speed, position and angle of the foot and adjust the timing and pattern of the flashing of the light source to generate the display accordingly. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEUNG C SOHN whose telephone number is (571)272-4123. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8 - 5. 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, GEORGIA EPPS can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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. /SEUNG C SOHN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 13, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12683540
SOLAR MODULE COUPLINGS FOR SOLAR TRACKER
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680942
RESIN COMPOSITION AND FLOW CELLS INCORPORATING THE SAME
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12669352
TreeEventID A SYSTEM FOR ACCURATE TREE HAZARD DETECTION ON AERIAL TELECOM CABLES USING DISTRIBUTED FIBER SENSING AND NOVEL InfoNCE-BASED LEARNING
1y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12666916
Teaching Substrate for Production and Process-Control Tools
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12663311
DETECTION DEVICE
1y 11m to grant Granted Jun 23, 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
87%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+9.0%)
2y 4m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 826 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