Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/962,269

DISHWASHER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 27, 2024
Priority
Jun 30, 2022 — RE 10-2022-0080943 +2 more
Examiner
KO, JASON Y
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 2m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
825 granted / 1092 resolved
+15.5% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
1111
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
47.2%
+7.2% vs TC avg
§102
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
§112
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1092 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) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by BOYER (US 2018/0242813). Re Claim 1, BOYER teaches a dishwasher comprising a tub 104; a sump 142; and a filter 204 coupleable and decoupleable from the water storage chamber (See Fig. 5 and [0037]) such that when it is coupled via rotation ([0037]) it is held in place along a vertical direction of the washing chamber (expected). Re Claim 2, Fig. 5 shows a first protrusion inwardly from the side 212 and second protrusion protruding upwardly from the first protrusion (above where reference numeral 222 is). Re Claim 3, 228 reads on the upper holding portion caught by the first coupling portion. Re Claim 4, 228 is the outward first extension and the portion below where 242 is the second extension extending downwardly. This also reads on the lower holding portion of Claim 5. Re Claim 6, the protrusion is expected to press against the filter when rotated, as rotation of the filter to secure it is taught and the diagram shows the parts flush with each other. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BOYER (US 2018/0242813). BOYER is relied upon as applied to the claims above. In the even that Claims 1-6 are not found to be anticipated by BOYER they are rejected as unpatentable over BOYER as the differences of rotating a filter via extensions and seating is both suggested by BOYER and also well known for mating and securing parts. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7-15 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. The particulars of these claims does not appear to be taught or obvious modifications to the prior art applied above. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON Y KO whose telephone number is (571)270-7451. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00-6:00. 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, Michael Barr can be reached at 571-270-1414. 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. JASON Y. KO Primary Examiner Art Unit 1711 /JASON Y KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 27, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12701946
BUFFING CLEANING APPARATUS
1y 10m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12686100
CLEANER FOR CHEMICAL MECHANICAL POLISHING APPARATUS
2y 12m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12685434
ENDOSCOPE CLEANING DEVICES
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12686036
CLEANING APPARATUS AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS
1y 8m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12680214
DRUM-TYPE WASHING MACHINE
2y 5m 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
92%
With Interview (+16.7%)
2y 11m (~1y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1092 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