Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/055,907

THIN METAL STRIP WINDING METHOD AND THIN METAL STRIP WINDING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 18, 2025
Priority
Mar 29, 2024 — JP 2024-058296
Examiner
MELIKA, ERMIA EMAD
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Honda Motor Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allowance Rate
24 granted / 35 resolved
+8.6% vs TC avg
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+37.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
79
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
84.8%
+44.8% vs TC avg
§102
4.7%
-35.3% vs TC avg
§112
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 35 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boggs et al. (US 4,239,187 A). Regarding claim 1, Boggs et al. discloses a thin metal strip winding method comprising: a thin metal strip manufacturing step of manufacturing a thin metal strip (Fig. 4; Col. 3, Ln. 37-49, filament 4 corresponding to a thin metal strip) by flying the thin metal strip from a flight tube (Fig. 4; Col. 4, Ln. 24-31, deflector plate 18 corresponding to a flight tube); a cutting and grasping step of performing cutting and grasping any portion of the thin metal strip flying from the flight tube (Fig. 4; Col. 4, Ln. 11-23); a thin metal strip connecting step of connecting the any portion of the thin metal strip cut and grasped in the cutting and grasping step and a leader as a ribbon, the leader being a to-be-connected portion of another thin metal strip remaining on a winding roll set on a winding roll rotation unit of a winder that winds up the thin metal strip (Fig. 1-2; Col. 3, Ln. 37-68, gripping element 7 holding material end for connection to the wheel 5); and a thin metal strip winding step of winding the thin metal strip by winding up the ribbon around the winding roll by causing the winding roll rotation unit to rotate, wherein the thin metal strip manufacturing step and the thin metal strip winding step of winding the thin metal strip are performed simultaneously and in parallel to each other (Fig. 1-2; Col. 3, Ln. 37-68, wherein the filament 4 is wound as it is produced). Regarding claim 2, Boggs et al. discloses a thin metal strip winding system comprising: a flight tube which causes a thin metal strip to fly (Fig. 4; Col. 3, Ln. 37-49; Col. 4, Ln. 24-31, filament 4 deflecting through deflector plate 18); a winding roll rotation unit on which a winding roll with a thin metal strip remaining thereon is set (Fig. 1-2; Col. 3, Ln. 37-49; Col. 4, Ln. 24-66, winding wheel 5, 28 corresponding to a winding roll rotation unit with a winding roll); a cutting-grasping unit which performs cutting and grasping any portion of the thin metal strip flying from the flight tube (Fig. 1-2; Col. 4, Ln. 24-66, cut-and-grip mechanism 8); a connecting unit which connects the any portion of the thin metal strip cut and grasped by the cutting-grasping unit and a leader as a ribbon, the leader being a to-be-connected portion of the thin metal strip remaining on the winding roll (Fig. 1-2; Col. 3, Ln. 37-68, gripping element 7 holding material end for connection to the wheel 5); and a winding unit which winds up the ribbon around the winding roll by causing the winding roll rotation unit to rotate, wherein manufacturing of a thin metal strip by flying the thin metal strip from the flight tube and winding of the thin metal strip by winding up the ribbon around the winding roll at the winding unit are performed simultaneously and in parallel to each other (Col. 4, Ln. 11-66). Regarding claim 3, Boggs et al. discloses wherein the cutting-grasping unit has a cutter which cuts the ribbon; and a stopper which holds the ribbon in a state where the ribbon is disposed so as to surround the cutter, and the cutting-grasping unit cuts the ribbon by moving the cutter with the ribbon held by the stopper (Fig. 1-2; Col. 3, Ln. 37-68, gripping element 7 holding the filament as the cutter cuts the material). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boggs et al. (US 4,239,187 A) as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Mishra et al. (US 7,094,048 B2). Regarding claim 4, Boggs et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the leader ribbon being connected to a remaining ribbon for winding. However, Mishra et al. teaches wherein the connecting unit is configured to connect the leader and the ribbon in a state where the leader and the ribbon are disposed vertically, and the cutting-grasping unit is configured to cut the ribbon while placing the ribbon such that one end portion of the ribbon formed by cutting the ribbon and a remaining tip portion of the leader that is disposed vertically at the connecting unit overlap each other (Col. 10, Ln. 18-54, wherein the cutting and adhering operation between two ribbon ends are described; Col. 14, Ln. 25-40, wherein the holding of the ribbons are described). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have incorporated the operation and mechanisms of joining an end of the lead ribbon and the end of the remaining ribbon in order to provide a means for continuous winding operation. One skilled in the art merely requires the addition of the adhering assembly between the forming of the ribbon and the winding. Regarding claim 5, Boggs et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the leader ribbon being connected to a remaining ribbon for winding. However, Mishra et al. teaches wherein the connecting unit is configured to connect the leader and the ribbon in a state where the leader and the ribbon are disposed horizontally, and the cutting-grasping unit cuts the ribbon near the connecting unit and places one end portion of the cut ribbon around a remaining tip portion of the leader (Col. 10, Ln. 18-54, wherein the cutting and adhering operation between two ribbon ends are described; Col. 14, Ln. 25-40, wherein the holding of the ribbons are described). Reasons to combine and incorporate the disclosure of Boggs et al. and Mishra et al. are above and are reincorporated. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references refer to a winding assembly of a material strip which provides a means for cutting and joining said ribbon. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERMIA E MELIKA whose telephone number is (571)270-5162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST and a flexed schedule on Fridays from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM EST. 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, Victoria P. Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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. ERMIA E. MELIKA Examiner Art Unit 3654 /ERMIA E. MELIKA/ Examiner, Art Unit 3654 /ANNA M MOMPER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 18, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12667174
BELT RETRACTOR, BAG USING BELT RETRACTOR, AND HELMET
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12662344
Pouch Roll Replacement System
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12649639
System and Method for Building a Roll of Material
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12617643
UNWINDING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR UNWINDING A TIRE COMPONENT FROM A STOCK REEL AND FOR OUTPUTTING SAID TIRE COMPONENT IN A TRANSPORT DIRECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12600318
VEHICLE SENSOR DEVICE AND SEAT BELT RETRACTOR EMPLOYING SAME
2y 4m to grant Granted Apr 14, 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
69%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+37.9%)
2y 4m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 35 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