Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/932,297

SUBSTRATE CART AND RELATED SYSTEMS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 30, 2024
Examiner
FERGUSON SAMRETH, MARISSA LIANA
Art Unit
2853
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
73%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
537 granted / 773 resolved
+1.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+3.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
796
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
54.1%
+14.1% vs TC avg
§102
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
§112
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 773 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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. Claims 1-19 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. With respect to claim 1, the recitation “A substrate cart” is indefinite. Specifically, it is noted that “a cart” is normally used to move elements from one location to another location. The claims do not appear to be moving elements from one location to another therefore it is not clear how the claims could be considered to be a cart. It appears the claims are a type of a framing registration apparatus due to the structural elements that are recited in the claims. For purposes of furthering prosecution and until further clarification the examiner will treat the claims as a framing registration apparatus until further clarification. 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. Claims 1-3 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Flockhart (US Patent 1,892,268). With respect to claim 1, Flockhart teaches a substrate cart (Page 1, Lines 40-45, Figure 1) comprising: a base frame (9, Figure 1) having outer perimeter (outer perimeter of bars 9, Figure 1) and an inner perimeter (inner perimeter of bars, Figure 1); at least one adaptor position and locator feature (8, Figure 1) disposed on the base frame outer perimeter (Figure 1); and at least one registration system (left rail 1) coupled to the base frame inner perimeter (Figure 1). With respect to claim 2, Flockhart teaches a rectangular outer and inner perimeter formed by a front member (inner and outer perimeter formed by bars 9, Figure 1), a rear member (bottom bar 9, Figure 1), and a pair of side members (9, left and right bars 9, Figure 1) wherein at least a first registration system (top rail 1) is coupled to an inner surface of the front member within the inner perimeter (Figure 1), and a second registration system (bottom rail) is coupled or to the an inner surface of the rear member within the inner perimeter (Figure 1). With respect to claim 3, Flockhart teaches having at least one inner member (inner rail 1) coupled between the pair of side members (left and right bars 9) proximal the rear member (bottom bar 9), the inner member defining a rear first opening (top opening in right rail receiving screw 8, Figure 1) and a front second opening (bottom opening in right rail 1 receiving screw 8, Figure 1). With respect to claim 18, Flockhart teaches having a first inner member (top right screw 8) coupled between the pair of side members (left and right side bars 9) proximal the rear member (bottom bar 9, Figure 1), a second inner member (bottom right screw 8, Figure 1) coupled between the pair of side members proximal the front member (Figure 1), a third inner member (right center screw 8, Figure 1) coupled between the first inner member and the second inner member proximal a second side member of the pair of side members (Figure 1). 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. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Flockhart (US Patent 1,892,268) in view of Spiro (US Publication 20210276363). With respect to claim 19, Flockhart teaches the claimed invention with the exception of having a unique identifier coupled to the base frame. Spiro a unique identifier coupled to the base frame (Paragraph 0068, markings identified by shapes). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the present invention was made to modify the invention taught by Flockhart to provide a unique identifier coupled to a base frame as taught by Sprio for the purpose of improving speed and accuracy. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. With respect to claim 4, the prior art does not teach or render obvious at least first registration system comprising a spine member; a first transport wheel coupled to a proximal end of the spine member, a second transport wheel coupled to a distal end of the spine member; a registration alignment feature set disposed in the spine member; at least one hold down block coupled to the spine member; and a registration guide coupled to the spine member. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Losiewicz et al. (US 2020/0396843), Froio et al. (CA2716571) and Cronin (US Patent 4,404,903) teach framing structures. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARISSA LIANA FERGUSON SAMRETH whose telephone number is (571)272-2163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m.-5 p.m. 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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 571-272-2149. 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. /Marissa Ferguson-Samreth/Examiner, Art Unit 2853 /CHRISTOPHER E MAHONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 30, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Apr 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594756
SYSTEM FOR RECOVERING A CLEANING SOLUTION AND PRINTING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583249
ROLLER FOR HOT STAMPING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577080
PRINTING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576654
FOOD PRODUCT SCALE AND ASSOCIATED LABEL STOCK JUSTIFICATION ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12558916
METAL DECORATION MANUFACTURING APPARATUS AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
73%
With Interview (+3.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 773 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month