Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/096,957

INSULATED PANEL STRUCTURE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Apr 01, 2025
Examiner
TRAVERS, MATTHEW P
Art Unit
3726
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Systemes Norbec Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
404 granted / 640 resolved
-6.9% vs TC avg
Strong +44% interview lift
Without
With
+44.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
692
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
42.9%
+2.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
§112
30.9%
-9.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 640 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 3-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/25/2025. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: locking member (claim 1). Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function (e.g. a cam surface - e.g. claim 2, Fig. 2C), and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. 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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by You et al. (KR2011116830, with reference to translation). Claim 1: You et al. discloses an insulated panel lateral connector for connecting two side-by-side insulated panels (intended use, see below), said insulated panels comprising foam sandwiched between sheeting material (this pertains to the article worked upon by the claimed apparatus, see below), said connector (100) comprising: a body having a flange (140) and a cylindrical aligning shaft (120 - paragraph 15) extending from said flange (Fig. 1), said cylindrical aligning shaft being insertable into a hole in said sheeting material of one of said insulated panels until said flange engages said sheeting material of said one of said insulated panels (intended use, though the fastener is capable of this function - see Fig. 10); and a rotatable locking member (130) connected to said body and configured for one of: (1) engaging with said sheeting material of another one of said two side-by-side insulated panels; and (2) engaging with a rotatable locking member of a connector of another one of said two side-by-side insulated panels (e.g. as shown in Fig. 10 and paragraph 21). A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. While the fastener 100 is not necessarily used as claimed, it is nevertheless structured as claimed and presumed capable of performing he claimed functions. It is also noted that a claim is only limited by positively recited elements. Thus, "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935). MPEP 2115. Claim 2: Said rotatable locking member comprises a cam surface (130/132) for engaging with an aperture in said sheeting material of another one of said two side-by-side insulated panels (as noted above). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. PGPub 2009/0067947 discloses a fastener having a similar shape as You et al. (see Fig. 3). U.S. PGPub 2018/0016786 may broadly read on claims 1-2 where the head of the screw 26 acts as a flange, the shank acts as a cylindrical shaft, and the threads act as a locking member/cam. U.S. Patents 10,428,858, 10,126,078, 9,233,589, and 3,006,443, U.S. PGPub 2016/0195119, JP02113110, GB2108622, and CN107956772 disclose various eccentric fasteners with features reading broadly on those claimed. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW P TRAVERS whose telephone number is (571)272-3218. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00AM-6:30PM. 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, Sunil K. Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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. /Matthew P Travers/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 01, 2025
Application Filed
Dec 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598725
CONFORMABLE COLD PLATE FOR FLUID COOLING APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594652
ROTARY INSTALLATION TOOLS FOR CLINCH FASTENERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584465
MULTIPLE UP-TOWER LIFTING APPLIANCES ON WIND TURBINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12554228
GRIPPER DEVICE FOR MAINTAINING, CENTRING, AND/OR CLAMPING A MICROMECHANICAL OR HOROLOGICAL COMPONENT, AND ASSOCIATED FASTENING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12544866
Shrink Fitting System
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
63%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+44.2%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 640 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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