Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/943,034

DISTANCE DETECTOR, PROCESSING HEAD AND PROCESSING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 11, 2024
Priority
May 06, 2023 — CN 202310509604.8 +2 more
Examiner
PHAN, MINH Q
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Makeblock Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
71%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
641 granted / 845 resolved
+15.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -5% lift
Without
With
+-5.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
867
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
§103
46.4%
+6.4% vs TC avg
§102
28.2%
-11.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 845 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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) 1-2, 4 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lin (CN 115122635). Regarding claims 1-2, 4 and 10-11, Lin teaches a distance detector, comprising: a housing (31); a detection member (321); and a trigger (3213) connected to the detection member, wherein a part of the detection member is slidably inserted into the housing along a length direction of the detection member; and the trigger is configured to move with a sliding of the detection member to trigger a sensing member (324) provided at a first installation position; PNG media_image1.png 492 532 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein a guide slot extending along the length direction of the detection member is provided on a side surface of the housing, the trigger is at least partially located outside the housing and configured to slide in the guide slot within the sliding of the detection member to trigger the sensing member [claim 2]; an elastic reset member (322) provided in the housing, wherein the elastic reset member is drivingly connected to the detection member to apply a force to the detection member to extend out of the housing [claim 4]; wherein the detection member (321) comprises a detection end and a force-bearing end, and a cross-sectional area of the force-bearing end gradually increases in a direction from the force-bearing end to the detection end (the probe 321 has a pointy end, wherein a cross-sectional area of the pointy end gradually increased toward the direction of the detection end) [claim 10]; a side surface of the housing is provided with a peripheral edge, the peripheral edge is enclosed to form an avoidance space, and the trigger is provided inside the avoidance space (Fig. 4) [claim 11]. 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(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Liu et al. (CN 110481012). Regarding claim 3, Lin teaches all the claimed limitations except for the sensing member comprises a transmitting end and a receiving end, and the trigger is configured to slide into or out of a space between the transmitting end and the receiving end to block the receiving end from receiving a signal emitted by the transmitting end. Liu teaches a distance detector comprising: a sensing member (Fig. 2, item 5) comprises a transmitting end and a receiving end, and a trigger (6) is configured to slide into or out of a space between the transmitting end and the receiving end to block the receiving end from receiving a signal emitted by the transmitting end. It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a sensing member as taught by Liu for Lin’s sensing member since it has been held that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable result would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-9 and 12-13 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. Claims 14-20 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 5-9, applicant has sufficiently defined and claimed a distance detector, whereby the prior art does not teach or suggest a stopper is provided in the housing, the trigger is connected to a side surface of the stopper, and the stopper is sleeved outside the detection member and fixedly connected to the detection member, in combination with all other limitations set forth in the claim. Regarding claims 12-13, applicant has sufficiently defined and claimed a distance detector, whereby the prior art does not teach or suggest the distance detector is detachably installed on a processing head, the processing head is provided with the first installation position and a second installation position opposite to the first installation position, the sensing member is provided at the first installation position, and the distance detector is provided at the second installation position; and the distance detector further comprises a magnetic structure, and the magnetic structure is provided at the housing to allow the distance detector to be magnetically fixed at the second installation position, in combination with all other limitations set forth in the claim. Regarding claims 14-15, applicant has sufficiently defined and claimed a processing head, whereby the prior art does not teach or suggest the housing comprises a first installation position inside, the sensing member is provided at the first installation position, the housing comprises a second installation position outside opposite to the first installation position, and the second installation position is provided with a distance detector; and the second installation position comprises a slide slot, in combination with all other limitations set forth in the claim. Regarding claims 16-20, applicant has sufficiently defined and claimed a processing device, whereby the prior art does not teach or suggest the sensing member is provided inside the processing head, the distance detector is provided outside the processing head and opposite to the sensing member, in combination with all other limitations set forth in the claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH Q PHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3898. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm. 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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. MINH Q. PHAN Primary Examiner Art Unit 2852 /MINH Q PHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 11, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704769
CAMERA SUPPORT SYSTEM HAVING LOCKABLE DAMPERS
2y 4m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12697641
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND ULTRASONIC SENSOR
2y 10m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12692847
ACTUATORS
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12693583
MAGNETIC CAMERA MOUNT
2y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12681043
ELECTRICALLY CONDUCTIVE CONTACT PIN
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 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
76%
Grant Probability
71%
With Interview (-5.0%)
2y 2m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 845 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