Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/991,415

COIL-TYPE FLUID-IMPERVIOUS ZIPPER AND COMMERCIAL PRODUCT USING SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 21, 2024
Priority
Jan 22, 2024 — TW 113102467 +1 more
Examiner
LEE, MICHAEL S
Art Unit
3677
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Shiu-Yin Cheng
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allowance Rate
536 granted / 851 resolved
+11.0% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
916
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
39.4%
-0.6% vs TC avg
§102
35.7%
-4.3% vs TC avg
§112
21.1%
-18.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 851 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 2-7, 9-11, 13 and 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant’s election of Species A in the reply filed on 12 May 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point any errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). 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. 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. Claim(s) 1, 8, 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou (US 2021/0107244) in view of Neugebauer (US 6,343,408). Regarding claim 1, Chou discloses an apparatus comprising: a pair of chains (2) connected with a pair of supporting tapes (11); a pair of filler structures (33, 34) made of a first thermoplastic elastomer (3; Paragraph 52, line 7 describes wherein material 3 is a high polymer elastomer, Paragraph 80 further lists PVC as a thermoplastic material used for the elastomer member) formed within the pair of chains correspondingly (Fig. 3 as shown); and an extension strip (4a) made of a second thermoplastic elastomer (4c, Paragraph 67, line 15, Paragraph 80 further lists PVC as a thermoplastic material used for the elastomer member) and attached to a free edge surface of a first one of the pair of filler structures (Fig. 5 as shown); wherein, when the coil-type fluid-impervious zipper is zipped up, the extension strip and a second one of the pair of filler structures are compressed to engage with each other within a first gap formed between the pair of filler structures, so as to minimize a second gap between the extension strip and the second one of the pair of filler structures (Figs. 6-7 as shown). Chou fails to explicitly disclose wherein the supporting tapes are fabric. Neugebauer teaches wherein support tapes are known to be made from fabric (Column 3, lines 32-34 describe the base tape as a woven fabric). From this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to recognize the advantage of the use a fabric material for its flexibility, resilience and strength. Using the woven fabric tape material Neugebauer in place of the support tape of Chou would provide the desired flexibility, resilience and strength required in garments undergoing the stress experienced by a user closing and opening a slide fastener in garments and other applications. Regarding claim 8, Chou further discloses wherein at least one surface of the pair of supporting fabric tapes is impregnated or coated with a water repellent agent to make the pair of supporting fabric tapes water-repellent (Fig. 5 shows wherein a surface of the tape opposite to the elements is coated with waterproof layer 4). Regarding claim 12, Chou further discloses a commercial product (Paragraphs 2-3 disclose several commercial products: snowsuit, clothes, pants, purse, backpack, etc.) including the coil-type fluid-impervious zipper as disclosed in claim 1. Regarding claim 14, Chou further discloses the commercial product as disclosed in claim 12, being an article of commercial product selected from a group consisting of an article of clothes, an article carrier, and a camping gear (Paragraph 2 lists a camping tool, clothes and purse/backpack). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chou (US 2010/0125982) and Chou (US 2024/0398072) for a slide fastener wherein a polymeric material is pressed between opposed tape edges. Williams (US 2012/0023713) for a waterproof layer pressed together to seal the gap between tape edges. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-5735. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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, Jason San can be reached at (571) 272-6531. 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. /MICHAEL S LEE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3677
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 21, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12680565
CLIP AND CLIP ATTACHMENT STRUCTURE
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12650156
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR A DUAL HOOK FLAT STRAP ATTACHMENT DEVICE AND ACCESSORIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12616278
Plug and Buckle
2y 6m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12593897
STRAP BUCKLE
2y 6m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12564249
COMPOSITE FASTENER
1y 4m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
63%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+20.8%)
2y 4m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 851 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