Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 19/016,460

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SHELTERING IN PLACE WITH ADVANCED RESPONDER NOTIFICATION AND READY ACCESS

Non-Final OA §112§DP
Filed
Jan 10, 2025
Examiner
LUGO, CARLOS
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
929 granted / 1243 resolved
+22.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
1294
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
41.8%
+1.8% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
37.6%
-2.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1243 resolved cases

Office Action

§112 §DP
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 . 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 1-26 and 28-30 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12227975. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: The claims requires a door locking apparatus that comprises a locking pin carrier with a plurality of pins, a releasable brake, and other limitations that are presented in the ‘975 patent. 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. Claims 1-30 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. Claims 1, 10, 19 and 23 require that the locking pin carrier is biased in an unlocked position when the carrier is in contact with the upper flange. At the instant, the limitation is indefinite. PNG media_image1.png 749 1427 media_image1.png Greyscale As shown above, the locking pin carrier 22C actually is biased by springs 22j and 22k, that when the brake is released, they will bias the locking pin carrier upwardly to the unlatched position. The upper flange 22I is used as a stop surface when the carrier is moved upwardly. Therefore, in order to continue with the examination, the limitation will be interpreted as the device further comprising the rod springs 22J and 22K, and that the locking pin carrier being moved toward the unlatched position by the rod springs when the brake is released and stopped by the carrier engaging the upper flange. Correction is required (see parent case for the language discussed to overcome the rejection). Claim 1 requires that the locking pins will be positioned on a strike on the floor to lock and biased to unlock. However, without a releasing mechanism (broadly claiming the release member or the locking cylinder) the invention as claimed cannot perform the function claimed. Therefore, in order to continue with the examination, the claim will be interpreted as also comprising a releasing mechanism that is configured to be activated to release the locking pin carrier from the locked position. Correction is required. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 10, 19 and 23, as interpreted above, 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. PNG media_image2.png 690 857 media_image2.png Greyscale Wadlow discloses a locking apparatus that comprises a locking pin carrier (128) comprising a plurality of locking pins (152) configured to be positioned in a floor strike (168), and a release member (key cylinder) mounted on a body plate (104). PNG media_image3.png 590 758 media_image3.png Greyscale CN 10793192 teaches a locking pin carrier (4), having a locking pin (3), movable mounted between upper and lower flanges (102 and 103) of a body plate (101). PNG media_image4.png 625 1269 media_image4.png Greyscale Duffy teaches that it is well known in the art to provide support rods (22a and 22b), fixed to respective fixed surfaces of a body member (18), to support and guide the movement of a locking pin carrier (23) having a locking pin (24). However, it would be hindsight to provide the teachings into the device that Wadlow discloses. Also, even combined, the “combination” will fail to disclose other aspects of the claimed invention. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS LUGO whose telephone number is (571)272-7058. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6pm. 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, Kristina 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 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. /Carlos Lugo/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3675 February 13, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 10, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601209
FLUSH HANDLE ASSEMBLY FOR A VEHICLE DOOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598713
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR OPENING A RECEIVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595692
AUTO FLUSH DOOR HANDLE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584330
LATCH ASSEMBLY WITH REMOVABLE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578054
Double Door Retainer
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
75%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+14.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1243 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month