Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/077,884

METHOD FOR ROTATING AN ELONGATED BODY

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Mar 12, 2025
Priority
Apr 19, 2021 — EU 21169219.9 +2 more
Examiner
HESS, DOUGLAS A
Art Unit
3651
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Pip Innovations B V
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allowance Rate
1131 granted / 1273 resolved
+36.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
1280
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
50.0%
+10.0% vs TC avg
§102
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
§112
21.3%
-18.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1273 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 2. 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. Claim 3 is 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. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the slot" in lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorenson WO2016/083622. See the attached (2) marked up drawing figure sheets depicting the claimed features. Sorenson teaches all of the claimed features including two different alignment lane shapes (figure 2-semi V-shaped) and (figure 3-U shaped). Sorenson’s is loosely interpreted as a semi V-shaped but not like the applicants’ V-shape. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to utilize one of many known shapes for a conveyor alignment lane based on the shape of the object being conveyed and the function being performed on such an article and the mere claiming of a specific shape of a conveyor does not provide a patentable departure over the device of Sorenson. Furthermore, the device of Sorenson performs equally well with his shaped alignment lanes. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 2, 4-8 are allowed. Claim 3 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 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 DOUGLAS A HESS whose telephone number is (571)272-6915. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8-6. 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, Gene Crawford can be reached at 571-272-6911. 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. /DOUGLAS A HESS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651 DAH June 10, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 12, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12679666
Article Transport Facility
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12673826
Conveying Arrangement
2y 10m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12668439
VARIABLE BRAKING SYSTEMS AND DEVICES
1y 8m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12662318
GUARD ASSEMBLY FOR A CONVEYOR SYSTEM
2y 3m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12654954
CONTAINER TAKING AND CONVEYING ASSEMBLY, LOADING AND UNLOADING DEVICE, AND PICKING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 16, 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
89%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+10.7%)
1y 11m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1273 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