Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/946,666

Autonomous Modular Robotic Cart Device

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Nov 13, 2024
Examiner
MANCHO, RONNIE M
Art Unit
3657
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Pringle Technologies Incorporated
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 5m
Est. Remaining
77%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
749 granted / 987 resolved
+23.9% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+1.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1047
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
27.9%
-12.1% vs TC avg
§102
31.5%
-8.5% vs TC avg
§112
33.6%
-6.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 987 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-20 are 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 1 recites, “……, and the interface device being housed within the robotic base; the vertical support extends vertically from the robotic base; the vertical support extends beyond the waste receptacle such that the interface device is offset above the waste receptacle; and the vertical support is an elongated member comprising a first distal end and a second distal end wherein the first distal end is coupled to the robotic base and the second distal end is coupled to the interface device.” The applicant’s specification and drawings only show an interface device offset above the waste receptacle, NOT “housed within the robotic base” as recited in the claim. This is new matter. The rest of the claims are rejected for depending on a rejected base claim or for having similar deficiencies as the base claim. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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. Communication Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONNIE MANCHO whose telephone number is (571)272-6984. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs. 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, Adam Mott can be reached at 571 270 5376. 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. /RONNIE M MANCHO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 13, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Aug 26, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 28, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12767173
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING A VEHICLE USING HIGH PRECISION AND HIGH RECALL DETECTION
3y 10m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12767050
SYSTEM FOR DISPLAYING IMAGE AROUND WORK VEHICLE, METHOD, AND WORK VEHICLE
1y 12m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12752622
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ALLOCATING BATTERY POWER FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES WITH A DISCONNECT CLUTCH
2y 10m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12752421
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION IN COMPUTER-ASSISTED DEVICES
1y 10m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12703251
TORQUE CONTROL SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DRIVE SYSTEMS OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES
2y 4m to grant Granted Aug 11, 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
76%
Grant Probability
77%
With Interview (+1.5%)
3y 4m (~1y 5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 987 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