Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 06, 2026
Application No. 19/000,777

FOLDING HANDRAIL STRUCTURE FOR PET RAMPS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 24, 2024
Priority
Dec 09, 2024 — CN 2024230251309
Examiner
CANFIELD, ROBERT
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Shenzhen Huikaida Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
882 granted / 1160 resolved
+24.0% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
1182
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
§102
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
§112
34.2%
-5.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1160 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status This is a first office action on the merits for application serail number 19/000,777 filed 12/24/24. Claims 1-7 are pending. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. The drawings are objected to because the view numbers must be larger than the reference numbers in accordance with 37 CFR 1.84(u)(2). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the two rods connected to both sides of both the first and second plates must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification should number paragraphs. Paragraphs ends with periods “.” not colons “:” or semi-colons “;”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1-7 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims should be one sentence only. Capitalization of the first word of lines 2, 7 and 14 is improper. The claims are replete with terms which lack antecedent basis rendering the claims indefinite. Examples include “the first support plate”, “the second support plate”, “The regulating component” and “the protective components” of claim 1, “the positioning slot(s)” of claim 2 and “the locking screw” of claim 7. It is not clear which support component “the support component” is at line 7 of claim 1 as the claim introduces plural supporting components. The last line of claim 1 appears inaccurate. It recites that the two first rotating rods are connected to both sides of each of the first and second support plate. No one set of two rods is connected to both sides of both the first and second plates as understood and shown. Claims 1-7 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to teach of adequately suggest a folding handrail assembly with a second plate hinged to the first plate each plate having storage grooves with protective components on each side including a crossbeam and two rotating rods connect4ed at the ends of the cross beam and two the supporting plates. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT CANFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-6840. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6, some Saturdays. 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, David Dunn can be reached at 571-272-6670. 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. ROBERT CANFIELD Primary Examiner Art Unit 3636 /Robert Canfield/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 24, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12698640
TELESCOPIC POLES AND TENT FRAME HAVING SAME
2y 2m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12692008
EVACUATION INFLATABLE HAVING SELF-HEALING FABRIC
4y 10m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12690649
VENTED CANOPY SYSTEM FOR UMBRELLAS
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12671134
UMBRELLA HUB AND BATTERY PACK ASSEMBLY
2y 10m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12668293
Wagon with Folding Canopy for Carrying Children
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 30, 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
94%
With Interview (+18.2%)
2y 0m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1160 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