Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/907,645

STACKER CRANE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 07, 2024
Priority
Nov 02, 2023 — JP 2023-188854
Examiner
MUDWILDER, MICHELLE MARIE PETERS
Art Unit
3654
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Daifuku Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allowance Rate
105 granted / 151 resolved
+17.5% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+31.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
175
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
82.8%
+42.8% vs TC avg
§102
7.0%
-33.0% vs TC avg
§112
9.9%
-30.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 151 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . This is the first action on the merits of application 18/907,645. Claims 1-4 are currently pending. 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. Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP H0624520 A (Kamiide) in view of DE 102022000113 A1 (Pfaff). Regarding claim 1, Kamiide teaches: A stacker crane comprising: a carrier section (8) configured to travel on a track (“traveling rail,” page 2 of the attached machine translation, last paragraph, lines 2-3); a mast (12) provided upright on the carrier section; a carriage (1) provided so as to be capable of being raised and lowered with respect to the mast; a raising and lowering motor (20) configured to raise and lower the carriage; a traveling motor (traveling motor is within drive unit B) configured to cause the carrier section to travel; a control machine (A) configured to drive at least one of the raising and lowering motor and the traveling motor; and a regeneration resistor (16) configured to consume regenerative energy caused when at least one of the raising and lowering motor and the traveling motor carries out regeneration operation, the mast having at least a first portion (lower portion) and a second portion (upper portion) disposed on the first portion and coupled to the first portion, the control machine (A) being fixed to the first portion. Kamiide does not teach: the regeneration resistor being fixed to the second portion. However, Pfaff teaches: A stacker crane, and A braking resistor (4) and energy store (5), fixed to the second (upper) portion of the mast (1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the regeneration resistor of Kamiide above the control machine as taught by Pfaff with a reasonable expectation of success to save space in the traveling direction of the carrier section. The arrangement of the components of Kamiide creates a large footprint of the carrier with the control machine on one side of the masts and the drive and regeneration resistor extending in the opposite direction on the other side of the masts. Pfaff teaches a stacked configuration that minimizes space requirements along the traveling direction. Regarding claim 2, Kamiide further teaches: comprising a plurality of the masts (11, 12) disposed so as to be adjacent to each other when seen in plan view from a direction perpendicular to a floor surface (figure 1). Kamiide does not teach: the control machine and the regeneration resistor being disposed between the plurality of the masts. However, Pfaff teaches: the control machine (including 3) and the regeneration resistor (4, 5) being disposed between the plurality of the masts (side walls of tower 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the control machine and regeneration resistor of Kamiide between the masts as taught by Pfaff to further reduce the footprint of the carrier to allow for movement in narrow locations. On page 5, paragraph 9, lines 1-4 Pfaff notes, “Other components required in the control cabinet, such as connection devices, in particular I/O terminals, at least one controller and/or one supply module, in particular a 24V supply module, can preferably also be arranged in the interior of the tower 1 and the mobile part can therefore be made shorter in the direction of movement.” Containing the components within the tower/between vertical sidewalls or masts allows the carrier or mobile part to be shorter in the movement direction. Regarding claim 3, Pfaff further teaches: wherein the control machine and the regeneration resistor are, between the plurality of the masts, fixed to one of the plurality of the masts (page 3, last two lines through page 4, line 3, “In an advantageous embodiment, the switch cabinet has two side wall parts, in particular side wall parts designed as sheet metal parts, of the switch cabinet, each of the side wall parts being connected to the frame, another side wall part, in particular a side wall part designed as a sheet metal part, of the control cabinet is connected to the two side wall parts”). Regarding claim 4, Kamiide further teaches: further comprising a housing (10) accommodating the regeneration resistor, the housing having a vent (17) causing an outside of the housing and an inside of the housing to communicate with each other. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE M MUDWILDER whose telephone number is (571)272-6068. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00 am - 7:30 pm. US-10815054-B2, US-20220073284-A1, US-20230211948-A1, JP-2000355405-A, JP-2001287807-A, WO-2016094923-A2, WO-2023184882-A1, and KR-102286398-B1 are cited to show stacker crane arrangements with means for handling regenerative energy and/or configurations with controls arranged between masts. US-20220402737-A1 is cited to show a stacker crane with distinct vertical portions connected by coupling structures. 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, VICTORIA AUGUSTINE can be reached at (313)446-4858. 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. /M.M.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3654 /ANNA M MOMPER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 07, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection (signed) — §103
Jan 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Feb 18, 2026
Response Filed
May 26, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12637329
ELEVATOR SILL CLEARANCE PROTECTION DEVICE AND ELEVATOR CAR
2y 6m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12637328
CONSTRUCTION ARRANGEMENT OF AN ELEVATOR AND METHOD FOR CONSTRUCTING AN ELEVATOR
2y 0m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12637330
METHOD OF ASSEMBLING AN ELEVATOR AND AN ELEVATOR
1y 7m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12607220
A BASE RING ASSEMBLY FOR A PNEUMATIC VACUUM ELEVATOR AND A METHOD THEREOF
2y 9m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12583714
METHOD FOR CONSTRUCTING AN ELEVATOR ARRANGEMENT AND AN ELEVATOR ARRANGEMENT
2y 0m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+31.3%)
2y 6m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 151 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