Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/888,948

SHAPE MEMORY ALLOY PRODUCTS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Sep 18, 2024
Examiner
CRANE, LAUREN ASHLEY
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Kohler Co.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
57%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 57% of resolved cases
57%
Career Allow Rate
478 granted / 836 resolved
-12.8% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
853
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.0%
+9.0% vs TC avg
§102
24.9%
-15.1% vs TC avg
§112
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 836 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 Invention I in the reply filed on 3/16/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 8-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 3/16/2026. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a moveable portion configured for selective movement relative to the base portion” in claim 1. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. 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. Claim 5-7 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 5 recites the limitation “a faucet” in line 1. This limitation is a double inclusion of the previous recited faucet recited in claim 4. Claim 6 recites the limitation “a toilet” in line 1. This limitation is a double inclusion of the previous recited toilet recited in claim 4. Claim 7 recites the limitation “a bidet wand” in line 2. The limitation is a double inclusion of the previous recited bidet wand recited in claim 4. 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. Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rexach et al (US Patent Publication 20140069511 herein after Rexach). Regarding Claim 1, Rexach shows a bathing fixture comprising: a base portion (3); a movable portion (1) configured for selective movement relative to the base portion (Fig.1); a shape memory alloy portion (2, 20) positioned between the base portion and the movable portion (paragraph 23), the shape memory alloy portion engaged with the movable portion to adjust a position of the movable portion when the shape memory alloy portion is activated by at least one of the following: a temperature change (paragraph 24). Regarding Claim 2, Rexach shows the bathing fixture of claim 1, further comprising a water supply (paragraph 4). Regarding Claim 3, Rexach shows the bathing fixture of claim 2, wherein a first temperature of water flowing through the water supply along the shape memory alloy portion corresponds to a first position of the shape memory alloy portion, and wherein a second temperature of water flowing through the water supply along the shape memory alloy portion corresponds to a second position of the shape memory alloy portion. Regarding Claim 4, Rexach shows the bathing fixture of claim 1, wherein the bathing fixture is at least one of a faucet (Fig.1, paragraph 20). Regarding Claim 5, Rexach shows the bathing fixture of claim 4, wherein the bathing fixture is a faucet (Fig.1, paragraph 20). Claim(s) 1, 4, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wiig et al (US Patent Publication 20100011493 herein after Wiig). Regarding Claim 1, Wiig shows a bathing fixture comprising: a base portion (toilet bowl; paragraph 41 lines 5-6); a movable portion (toilet seat) configured for selective movement relative to the base portion (paragraph 41); a shape memory alloy portion (14) positioned between the base portion and the movable portion (paragraph 43), the shape memory alloy portion engaged with the movable portion to adjust a position of the movable portion when the shape memory alloy portion is activated by at least one of the following an electrical current (paragraph 42). Regarding Claim 4, Wiig shows the bathing fixture of claim 1, wherein the bathing fixture is at least one of a toilet (paragraph 9). Regarding Claim 6, Wiig shows the bathing fixture of claim 4, the bathing fixture is a toilet, wherein the base portion is a bowl of the toilet, and wherein the movable portion is a seat of the toilet (paragraph 42). 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. Claim(s) 4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiig et al (US Patent Publication 20100011493 herein after Wiig) in view of Allard et al (US Patent Publication 20110107507 herein after Allard). Wiig shows the bathing fixture of claim 4, but fails to show a bidet wand. Allard teaches a bathing fixture is at least one of a bidet wand (paragraph 9). Wherein adjustment of the shape memory alloy portion (74) causes a bidet wand to extend to a position for use (Fig.4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a bidet wand in order to clean the toilet. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Calkins et al (US Patent Publication 2017/0037982) is directed toward the teaching a of using a shape memory alloy to open and close a valve. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN ASHLEY CRANE whose telephone number is (571)270-5198. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays & Tuesdays 8 am - 4pm. 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, David Angwin can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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. /LAUREN A CRANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 18, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599269
TILEABLE RECEPTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595649
FLUIDICS DEVICES FOR PLUMBING FIXTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596390
TEMPERATURE ADJUSTMENT METHOD FOR AN INTELLIGENT TOILET, AN ELECTRONIC DEVICE, A STORAGE MEDIUM, AND AN INTELLIGENT TOILET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590448
CONTROL SYSTEM AND A CONTROL METHOD OF INTELLIGENT TOILETS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584301
LAVATORY CARRIER ASSEMBLY WITH WASTE LINE ACCESS PORT
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
57%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+31.7%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 836 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