Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/908,326

BALL STUD JOINT FOR A CHASSIS, METHOD FOR PRODUCING A CLOSURE COVER FOR SUCH A BALL STUD JOINT, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING A BALL STUD JOINT WITH A ACCORDINGLY PRODUCED CLOSURE COVER

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Oct 07, 2024
Priority
Oct 09, 2023 — DE 10 2023 209 829.6
Examiner
BINDA, GREGORY JOHN
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
ZF Friedrichshafen AG
OA Round
2 (Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
1480 granted / 1831 resolved
+20.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1854
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§103
19.6%
-20.4% vs TC avg
§102
38.2%
-1.8% vs TC avg
§112
37.8%
-2.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1831 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
Specification The disclosure is objected to because the detailed description of the invention fails to describe details corresponding to the limitations of claims 7-13 Claim Objections Claim 1, lines 13-14 is objected to because it includes the phrase “by means of the the recess”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 13 recites the limitation, “the metal [of the closure cover] comprises aluminum”. Applicant has not pointed out where this limitation is supported, nor does there appear to be a written description of the limitation in the application as originally filed. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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. Evidence that claim 1 and thus all claims depending on it fail(s) to correspond in scope with that which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA applications the applicant regards as the invention can be found in the reply filed August 27, 2026. In that paper, the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA applications the applicant states the prior art is overcome because it, unlike the invention, lacks a concave recess. This statement indicates that the invention is different from what is defined in the claim(s) because the recess in the claims is not recited as concave. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objections and 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. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). 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 Greg Binda whose telephone number is (571)272-7077. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-5:30 et. 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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at 571-270-3654. 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. /Greg Binda/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 07, 2024
Application Filed
May 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Aug 27, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 11, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12747760
STROKING AND ARTICULATING CONSTANT VELOCITY JOINT ASSEMBLY
3y 9m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12747761
TORQUE LIMITER, TRANSMISSION SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR ASSEMBLING SAID TORQUE LIMITER
3y 5m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12747759
TRIPOD TYPE CONSTANT VELOCITY UNIVERSAL JOINT
2y 7m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12738884
CONNECTION SYSTEM OF A TRANSMISSION ROD FOR SOLAR TRACKERS
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12736088
TRIPOD TYPE CONSTANT VELOCITY UNIVERSAL JOINT
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 15, 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
81%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+11.7%)
2y 6m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1831 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