Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/969,514

Utility Vehicle

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Dec 05, 2024
Examiner
NEUBAUER, THOMAS L
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Kubota Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
326 granted / 493 resolved
+14.1% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
533
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§102
28.7%
-11.3% vs TC avg
§112
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 493 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. Claim 5 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regrading claim 5, recitation of: “the insertion rods are off a line of flow of loading and unloading a cargo onto and from a floor plate” appears undefined and open to any interpretation. The cargo box has no constraint as to loading in any direction. It is unclear what structural requirement the applicant claims. The recitation will be taken broadly until objectively defined by the applicant. In view of the rejections above under 35 USC § 112, the claims referred to in any and all rejections below are rejected as best understood. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shinamura et al. (US 2009/0195048). Regarding claim 1, Shinamura et al. discloses a utility vehicle, comprising: a body frame (2); a front wheel (3) and a rear wheel (4) supporting the body frame relative to ground; a cargo box (6) comprising: a floor plate (40); a pair of left and right side covers(44); and a tail gate (46), wherein the cargo box is supported by the body frame in such a manner as to be swingable into a dumping orientation (Fig.5); a swing mechanism (69) configured to swing the tail gate between a closed position and an open position about a lateral swing axis at a lower end area of the tail gate; and a pair of left and right elastic coupling units ([0080], 70) each comprising an elastic element (spring biased latch 73) and configured to couple the tail gate in the closed position to a corresponding one of the side covers with the elastic element in-between. Regarding claim 6, Shinamura et al. the utility vehicle according to claim 1, further comprising: a pair of left and right lock mechanisms ([0080], 70) configured to lock the tail gate (46) in the closed position to the respective side covers, wherein the lock mechanisms each comprise: a first lock member (72); and a second lock member configured to receive the first lock member (75), and wherein, with the elastic coupling units each coupling the tail gate to the corresponding one of the side covers, the first lock member is apart from the second lock member by a gap smaller than maximum elastic deformation of the elastic coupling unit (Fig.10). 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 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shinamura et al. (US 2009/0195048) in view of Kim (KR 20020081963). Regarding claim 2, Shinamura et al. discloses the utility vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the elastic coupling units each comprise: Shinamura et al. does not disclose: an elastic plug having an insertion hole an insertion rod insertable into the insertion hole as the tail gate swings into the closed position. Kim teaches an elastic plug having an insertion hole an insertion rod (76) insertable into the insertion hole as the tail gate swings into the closed position for the purpose of improving an assembly performance of a knob by assuring a marginal tolerance sufficiently. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shinamura et al. with an elastic plug having an insertion hole an insertion rod (76) insertable into the insertion hole as the tail gate swings into the closed position as taught by Kim for the expected benefit of improving an assembly performance of a knob by assuring a marginal tolerance sufficiently. Regarding claim 3, Shinamura et al. as modified by Kim discloses the utility vehicle according to claim 2, wherein: the elastic plug (10; Kim) has a conical guide surface (Fig.4; Kim), and the insertion hole has a hole diameter equivalent to a diameter of the insertion rod (in as much as the instant application is “equivalent”) and has an insertion-side opening area so defined by the conical guide surface as to become gradually reduced to the hole diameter (Fig.4; Kim). Regarding claim 4, Shinamura et al. as modified by Kim discloses the utility vehicle according to claim 2, wherein: the insertion rod (30; Kim) of the left elastic coupling unit is fixed to a back end portion of the left side cover ([0080], 70 Shinamura et al.), the insertion rod of the right elastic coupling unit is fixed to a back end portion of the right side cover([0080], 70 Shinamura et al.), the elastic plug of the left elastic coupling unit is fixed to a left end portion of the tail gate, and the elastic plug of the right elastic coupling unit is fixed to a right end portion of the tail gate([0080], 70 Shinamura et al.). Regarding claim 5, Shinamura et al. as modified by Kim discloses the utility vehicle according to claim 4, wherein: the insertion rods (30; Kim) are off a line of flow of loading and unloading a cargo onto and from the floor plate (as best understood, any direction) . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as it may affect the patentability of applicant’s claimed invention is listed on the attached PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thomas L. Neubauer whose telephone number is 571.272.4864. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 8:00 AM through 5:00 PM EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina R. Fulton can be reached on 571-272-7376. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /T. L. N./ Examiner, Art Unit 3675 /KRISTINA R FULTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 05, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601202
LOCK WITH OVERRIDE MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595690
POSITIONING DEVICE FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE DOOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584332
DISPENSER LATCHING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577806
NARROW-TYPE DOOR-LOCK DRIVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565793
BATHROOM LOCK STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
66%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+19.7%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 493 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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