Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 19/037,834

Golf Grip Tool

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 27, 2025
Examiner
CHIU, RALEIGH W
Art Unit
3711
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
37Degrees Inc.
OA Round
4 (Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
65%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allowance Rate
496 granted / 758 resolved
-4.6% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-0.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
780
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.7%
-31.3% vs TC avg
§103
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
§102
22.7%
-17.3% vs TC avg
§112
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 758 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Specification The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the originally filed specification does not make mention of proper leverage as set forth in claims 1-8 and 11-28. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-8 and 11-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claims 1 and 18, the originally filed specification does not disclose or describe the recited leverage achieved by the button. Claims 2-8, 11-17 and 19-28 are rejected because they depend from either a rejected claim 1 or 18. With further regard to claim 24, the originally filed specification does not disclose an embodiment of the combination including both the simple spring and a light; the specification only describes either an electric light button or a simple spring, not the combination. See paragraphs [0012], [0026] et seq.Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Raleigh Chiu whose telephone number is (571) 272-4408. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Tuesday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eugene Kim, can be reached on (571) 272-4463. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000. It is noted that all practice before the Office is in writing (see 37 C.F.R. § 1.2) and the proper authority for action on any matter in this regard are the statutes (35 U.S.C.), regulations (37 C.F.R.) and the commentary on policy (MPEP). Therefore, no telephone discussion may be controlling or considered authority of Petitioner’s/Caller’s action(s). /RALEIGH W CHIU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 5 earlier events
Jan 08, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 17, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Apr 21, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 21, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 03, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 14, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 05, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12673257
CLAW POWER SUPPLY STRUCTURE
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12643033
ROULETTE DEVICE
3y 8m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12616886
STRUCTURAL ENERGY STORAGE WITH CARBON FIBER FOR SPORT EQUIPMENT SENSOR
4y 3m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12589288
DESKTOP ELASTIC LAUNCH GAME DEVICE
3y 8m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12551780
Amusement Activity Station
3y 8m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
65%
With Interview (-0.6%)
2y 3m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 758 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