Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 19, 2026
Application No. 18/908,890

JIG FOR FIREARM LOWER RECEIVER MANUFACTURE

Non-Final OA §102§112§DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Oct 08, 2024
Priority
Apr 18, 2017 — provisional 62/486,898 +4 more
Examiner
WILSON, LEE D
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Blackhawk Manufacturing Group Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
1489 granted / 1860 resolved
+20.1% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1879
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
§102
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§112
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1860 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112 §DOUBLEPATENT
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 Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for Jig assembly does not reasonably provide enablement for a Jig assembly. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to a Jig assembly without side plated the invention commensurate in scope with these claims. The invention was disclosed as working as side plates and the device has a minimum working structure which includes a temple plate, a centering means and side plates. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-6 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,138,727. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because these application share template and a centering means. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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- is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Chang et al 9009986.. Chang et al discloses the claimed invention as recited in the claims as shown below: 1. A jig assembly for machining portions of a blank of an unfinished firearm lower receiver, the blank having a buffer tube and a rear takedown aperture, the jig assembly comprising: a template plate 86 having a machining aperture and a pin aperture (area around pin 34) , the pin aperture configured to couple the blank with the template plate by the rear takedown aperture; and a centering means 1000 configured to removably engage the template plate, the centering means configured to align with a first void of the blank. PNG media_image1.png 423 618 media_image1.png Greyscale 2. The jig assembly of claim 1, wherein the centering means attaches to template plate with at least one tab.1001 PNG media_image1.png 423 618 media_image1.png Greyscale 3. The jig assembly of claim 1, wherein the centering means including an Opening 2000 configured to align with a laterally centered void on the blank. PNG media_image1.png 423 618 media_image1.png Greyscale 4. The jig assembly of claim 3, wherein the centering means has a central cylinder 2000 defining the opening. PNG media_image1.png 423 618 media_image1.png Greyscale 6. The jig assembly of claim 1, further comprising at least one side plate 24 extending from the template plate, the at least one side plate configured to support the template plate and the blank on a surface and the side plate includes alignment features. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(A) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1 ST paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and Terminal Disclaimer filed. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The 892 form discloses prior art being made of record. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEE D WILSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4499. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6;30-4;30. 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, BRIAN KELLER can be reached at 571-272-8548. 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. LEE D. WILSON Examiner Art Unit 3723 Ldw /LEE D WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 August 25, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 08, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112, §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12734619
WELDING CLAMP
3y 2m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12734624
HOLDER PLATE FOR NEGATIVE PRESSURE CHUCKING, HOLDER DEVICE FOR NEGATIVE PRESSURE CHUCKING, AND DE-BONDING STATION
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12733448
APPARATUS FOR PROCESSING A WAFER
4y 0m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12733449
PIN LIFTING DEVICE
3y 7m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12728610
ASSEMBLY PRESS TOOLHOLDER
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 08, 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
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+18.7%)
2y 9m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1860 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