Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/889,981

TRASH CAN

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Sep 19, 2024
Examiner
POON, ROBERT
Art Unit
3735
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Kohler Co.
OA Round
2 (Final)
41%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
68%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 41% of resolved cases
41%
Career Allow Rate
383 granted / 925 resolved
-28.6% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
87 currently pending
Career history
1012
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
44.2%
+4.2% vs TC avg
§102
22.6%
-17.4% vs TC avg
§112
29.1%
-10.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 925 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §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. Claim 2 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. Regarding claim 2, the scope of the claims is unclear because it is dependent upon claim 11 which has not been recited and thus it is not clear if the claim is intended to be dependent upon claim 1. Clarification of the scope of the claims is required. 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) 1, 3-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2010/0147865 to Yang et al. (Yang) in view of US Patent No. 11,338,994 to Wang et al. (Wang). Regarding claim 1, Yang discloses a trash can (20) comprising a frame comprising a base (34) and a casing (22) supported on the base, an upper support (24) coupled to the casing, a lid (30) coupled to and rotatable relative to the frame between a closed position and an open position, bag cover (28) rotatably coupled to upper support via a hinge (50), the bag cover including an outer wall (44), inner wall (46) offset inwardly from outer wall, recessed cavity defined by inner ledge (45) extending between outer wall (44) and inner wall (46), the recessed cavity configured to receive the lid in closed position (Fig 1), a channel (between 44, 46, Fig 8) defined between outer wall, inner wall and inner ledge, the channel being on opposite side of the inner ledge from recessed cavity. Yang does not explicitly teach top of lid substantially flush with top of bag cover when lid is closed. However, Wang discloses a trash container (Fig 1) and in particular discloses top of lid (11) substantially flush with top of bag cover (12). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the Yang lid flush with the top of the bag cover as suggested by Wang in order to conserve space. Regarding claim 3, Yang further discloses lid (30) rotatable about the hinge (50). Regarding claim 4, Yang further discloses bag cover (28) and lid (30) independently rotatable about common axis of rotation (Fig 3). Regarding claim 5, Yang further discloses inner wall (46) defining an opening of the bag cover (Fig 6). Regarding claim 6, Yang further discloses lid (30) is configured to cover the opening in closed position and reveal opening in open position (Fig 4). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7-20 allowed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT POON whose telephone number is (571)270-7425. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 8:30 am to 6:00 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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571)272-4561. 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. /ROBERT POON/ Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 19, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 22, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 12, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12564466
CONTAINER AND KIT FOR WASHING AND/OR DISINFECTING AND/OR STERILISING MEDICAL INSTRUMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12552590
PILL CONTAINER ASSEMBLY WITH OUTER SLEEVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12545499
ARTICLE ACCOMMODATION CONTRAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12543830
Multifunctional Dual Carry Bag System
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12540008
PACKING BODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
41%
Grant Probability
68%
With Interview (+26.7%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 925 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