Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 19/102,766

METHOD FOR PRODUCING LAYERED STEEL CORD

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Feb 10, 2025
Examiner
PATEL, TAJASH D
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
jiangsu xingda steel tyre cord Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
1266 granted / 1567 resolved
+10.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1602
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
45.6%
+5.6% vs TC avg
§102
11.7%
-28.3% vs TC avg
§112
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1567 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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 1. 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. 2. Claims 1-14 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 claim 1, on line 4 and in claim 8, on lines 3-4, each occurrence of “conventional steel filaments and the prestressed steel filaments” is indefinite since it is unclear to what parameters and standards are being applied for conventional steel filaments and the prestressed steel filaments since it does not positivity limit the metes and bound of patent protection as desired. Furthermore, in claim 8, on line 3, “a core wire” dependent on claim 1, recites “a core wire on line 5” is indefinite since it is unclear if this structure is the same or different from one another. Correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 3. 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. 4. Claims 1-2 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uryu (JP 2004277968 A). Uryu discloses a method for producing a layered steel cord including a steel cord (1) composed of six wires (13) disposed around a linear core wire (11) forming an inner sheath (12) and twelve wires (15) disposed over the inner sheath forming the outer sheath as shown in figures 1-6. Further, all filaments (15) are pre- twisted prior to being supplied to the stranding machine and compression processing is performed on the filaments to impart new helical plastic deformation, paragraphs 6-12 and 27-54. Also, two different monofilaments (15a, 15b) are arranged alternately in the stranding machine tool and twisted with the core wire (11) that forms the layered structural steel cord as shown in figures 1 and 2 However, Urvu does not show filaments being prestressed. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that steel cord having the filaments (15a, 15b) arranged alternately of Urva being pre-twisted prior to being suppled through the stranding machine are substantially prestressed to a certain degree in order to evenly distribute stress in forming the layered steel cord about the core wire or as required for a particular application thereof. With regard to claims 2 and 9, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that steel cord formed through the stranding machine of Urva can including but not limited to a straightener, overtwister, etc. in order to minimize the twisted steel cord from being warped or depending on end use thereof. Allowable Subject Matter 5. Claims 3-7 and 10-14 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. Claims 3 and 10 with its respective dependents are allowable because the prior art does not teach or suggest the recitation therein including a layered steel cord formed of alternating steel filaments being prestressed through an operation strep of prestressing on a filament production water tank. Conclusion 6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of the prior art references cited on PTO-892 discloses a layer steel cord with a steel filaments twisted about a core wire. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TEJASH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-4993. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am -5pm. 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, Clinton Ostrup can be reached at (571) 272-5559. 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. January 6, 2026 /TAJASH D PATEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 10, 2025
Application Filed
Jan 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Apr 03, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593885
SHOCK-ABSORBING ASSEMBLY AND BODY PROTECTION DEVICE INCLUDING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593881
MOLLE RETENTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595606
TUFTING MACHINE AND METHOD OF TUFTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595607
TUFTING MACHINE AND METHOD OF TUFTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594894
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR STITCHING A THREE DIMENSIONAL FORMED COMPONENT AND COMPONENTS FORMED FROM THE METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
81%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+6.9%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1567 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