Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 19/037,741

Ball and Blade Trigger Mechanism

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jan 27, 2025
Examiner
ELDRED, JOHN W
Art Unit
3641
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
767 granted / 992 resolved
+25.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
1014
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
44.1%
+4.1% vs TC avg
§102
14.8%
-25.2% vs TC avg
§112
15.7%
-24.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 992 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . 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 1-18 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. In claims 1 and 10, “fixed point, modified Scotch Yoke mechanism” is vague and indefinite. First, it is not clear how a Scotch Yoke mechanism is being “modified”, so the metes and bounds of the claim is unclear, especially since Scotch Yokes come in different types. Second, it is not clear what point is fixed or to what it is relatively fixed. In claims 1 and 10, “such that user movement of the trigger finger piece translates to releasing the hammer” is vague and indefinite. It is not clear what structure allows or is required to cause such an action. The relationship of the claimed elements is not sufficiently clear to show how this function would be realized. In claims 3 and 12, “a trigger blade working against a Ball” is vague and indefinite. It is not clear what limitations are implied by “working against a ball”. In claims 3 and 12, “within a Yoke element” is vague and indefinite. It is not clear if this is intended to be the same as the previously claimed Scotch Yoke mechanism or a different Yoke. In claims 6 and 15, “Scotch Yoke mechanism is formed integrally within … frame” and “forming the Scotch Yoke mechanism integrally within … frame” are each vague and indefinite. Since the mechanism appears to be formed with plural, separately moving parts (including a ball as disclosed) it is not clear how it can be integrally formed. In claims 7 and 16, “a pocket pistol frame” is vague and indefinite. It is not clear what the limitations of a “pocket” pistol would be. In claim 14, it is not clear if the “Spherical Yoke” is the same element as the previously claimed “Scotch Yoke”. Claims 1-18 would appear to 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 prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Browning and Khaidurov et al are cited as being of interest since they disclose firearm firing mechanisms. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to J. WOODROW ELDRED whose telephone number is (571)272-6901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30. 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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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. /J. Woodrow Eldred/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641 JWE
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 27, 2025
Application Filed
Jan 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601554
FIREARM LOADER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595988
Stitched Body Armor Panels with Offset Construction
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12571602
Trigger Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571605
Firearm Shooting Rest
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12566050
PROTECTIVE VEHICLE SURROUND SHIELD
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
77%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+7.8%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 992 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