Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/112,268

SUSPENSION ARM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 17, 2025
Examiner
FRISBY, KEITH J
Art Unit
3614
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Toyoda Iron Works Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
783 granted / 1011 resolved
+25.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +1% lift
Without
With
+1.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1032
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§103
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§102
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
§112
29.5%
-10.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1011 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 . Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In paragraph 0013, line 5, “decrease” should be changed to --decreases--. In paragraph 0018, line 6, “located” should be changed to --located at--. In paragraph 0069, line 1, “is” should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schantl (DE 102015005501 A1). Schantl discloses a suspension arm (e.g., Fig. 1), comprising: a bottom wall (e.g., the curved portion at the bottom of suspension link 2); a first side wall (e.g., the vertical portion of the suspension link 2 on a downstream (the right side as shown in Figs. 1 and 2) side) and a second side wall (e.g., the vertical portion of the suspension link 2 on an upstream (the left side as shown in Figs. 1 and 2) side) that protrude upward from the bottom wall and face each other; and an airflow guide section (e.g., a portion of air guide device 1 on the downstream (the right side as shown in Figs. 1 and 2) side of the first side wall between a base end at the bottom of the first side wall and a distal end at the top of the first side wall) that extends from the first side wall in a direction away from the second side wall, wherein the first side wall includes a base end (at the bottom of the first side wall) and a distal end (at the top of the first side wall), the base end being closer to the bottom wall in a protruding direction in which the first side wall protrudes from the bottom wall, and the distal end being away from the bottom wall in the protruding direction, and the airflow guide section extends from a portion of the first side wall between the base end and the distal end (Figs. 1 and 2). A direction in which the first side wall and the second side wall face each other is a first direction, a direction in which the first side wall protrudes is a second direction, a direction orthogonal to both the first direction and the second direction is a third direction, the first side wall extends in the third direction, and the airflow guide section has an elongated shape extending in the third direction along the first side wall (Figs. 1 and 2). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schantl (DE 102015005501 A1) in view of Fukuda (JP 2004-338458 A). Schantl teaches the limitations of claim 4, as explained above. Schantl does not teach the limitations of claim 5. Fukuda teaches a suspension arm (e.g., 4) wherein an airflow guide section (e.g., 21) includes curved portions at opposite ends in a third direction, each curved portion being curved such that a dimension of the curved portion from a first side wall gradually decreases as the curved portion extends in the third direction away from a central portion of the airflow guide section (Figs. 1, 2 and 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a curved portion/edge as taught by Fukuda for a substantially straight portion/edge of an airflow guide section as taught by Schantl to similarly provide “an aerodynamically favorable shape” (paragraph 0008 of Schantl) and improve “an aerodynamic characteristic of a vehicle” (abstract of Fukuda) “in order to improve fuel economy and driving performance” (see paragraphs 0005-0006 of Fukuda), and especially to make the airflow guide section more aerodynamic along a lateral direction. MPEP §2143(I)(B, C, D, and F). Furthermore, in the absence of persuasive evidence that the particular shape of the edge of the airflow guide section is significant, the claimed shape cannot serve to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the cited references. MPEP §2144.04(IV)(B). All the claimed elements were known in the cited prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results. MPEP §2143(I)(A). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2 and 3 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH J FRISBY whose telephone number is (571)270-7802. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM - 5:00PM. 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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571)270-5985. 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. /KEITH J FRISBY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 17, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594802
MOTOR VEHICLE WITH MULTI-MODE EXTREME TRAVEL SUSPENSION-SUSPENSION HYDRAULIC DESIGN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583722
Stability System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583413
THREE-DIMENSIONAL AIR BAG
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579918
COVER FINISH ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578063
A vehicle with a cryogenic container and efficient routing of the connection line
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
77%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+1.4%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1011 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