Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/895,514

Tool Chain, Chain Tool, Method for Identifying a Property of a Tool Chain and System for Identifying a Property of a Tool Chain

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Sep 25, 2024
Priority
Sep 26, 2023 — EU 23199870.9
Examiner
FLORES SANCHEZ, OMAR
Art Unit
3724
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Andreas Stihl AG & Co. KG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
1286 granted / 1739 resolved
+4.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
1751
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
40.9%
+0.9% vs TC avg
§102
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
§112
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1739 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION 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 2, 4, and 8-11 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. In claim 2, the limitations “a value of the plurality of chain links” is indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. In claim 4, the limitations “as high as the marked chain link” is indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. The claim doesn’t define which is the high of the link to make accurate comparison with the value claimed. Also, the specification doesn’t define the limitation. In claim 8, the limitations “different types of chain links” is indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. The limitations “and/or” is indefinite because it implies a combination of two mark of the same type and at the same time at least 20% different types. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 12-18 are allowed. Claims 2, 4, and 8-11 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. The following is an examiner' s statement of reasons for allowance: The claim is allowable because the prior art fails to teach at least one spatial sequence of the information together determines a logical sequence of at least the information, wherein the logical sequence of at least the information forms overall information for identifying a property of the tool chain as set forth in claims 1, 17, and 18. Sporrer teaches a plurality of links having a plurality of markings of the same and different shape or color for representing specific items of information such as manufacturer data, and/or fabrication data, and/or chain data, and/or timing control data of a timing chain, a particular logo or a particular name. However, Sporrer fails to teach the above limitations because there is reason for having a logical sequence in a timing chain where the links are the same. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR FLORES SANCHEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4507. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday8:00-4:00 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, Adam Eiseman can be reached at 571-270-3818. 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. /OMAR FLORES SANCHEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12741394
PUNCHING UNIT AND SHEET POST-PROCESSING DEVICE
1y 9m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12741329
BLADE ASSEMBLY WITH VENTILATION OPENINGS
1y 9m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12728512
CHISEL
3y 0m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12728336
RUST BLOCKER
2y 11m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12722320
BEAM HOLE PUNCHER
1y 9m to grant Granted Sep 01, 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
74%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+14.3%)
2y 10m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1739 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