Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/975,896

LOWERING ASSIST DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Dec 10, 2024
Priority
Sep 21, 2021 — provisional 63/246,595 +1 more
Examiner
EPPS, TODD MICHAEL
Art Unit
3632
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Rocking Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allowance Rate
709 granted / 972 resolved
+20.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1006
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
47.5%
+7.5% vs TC avg
§102
21.0%
-19.0% vs TC avg
§112
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 972 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . This is a non-final Office Action for serial number 18/975,896, Lowering Assist Device, filed on December 10, 2024. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,161,236. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the instant application and the patent are almost identical with a lowering assist device including a track housing, resistance mechanism and a platform. 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 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,540,539 to Wolfman et al. (Wolfman). Wolfman ‘539 discloses a lowering assist device (Figs 1 and 1A) configured to attach to a structure, comprising: a platform (58-seat) configured to move along a tracking housing (22) wherein the tracking housing is attached to the structure; and a resistance mechanism (80) housed within the track housing, wherein the resistance mechanism is configured to provide resistance to the platform as the platform moves within the track housing. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Patent No. 12,036,144 – adjustable support device Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TODD M. EPPS whose telephone number is (571) 272-8282. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am - 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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. /TODD M EPPS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632 March 5, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 10, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12638129
EXPANDED SCREEN
2y 10m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12637016
COMPONENT ASSEMBLY FOR A VEHICLE
2y 7m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12607293
ROTATING DEVICE
1y 6m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12583545
A Rear Mirror Assembly With Anti-Rotation Protection
3y 2m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584587
BRACKET, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR HANGING ARTICLES UNDER A STRUCTURE
1y 11m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
73%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+7.2%)
2y 4m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 972 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