Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 19/121,378

BEARING RING AND ROLLING BEARING

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 15, 2025
Priority
Oct 17, 2022 — nonprovisional of PCTCN2022125674
Examiner
WAITS, ALAN B
Art Unit
3617
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Schaeffler Technologies AG & Co. KG
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
949 granted / 1380 resolved
+16.8% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1419
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.6%
-38.4% vs TC avg
§103
41.1%
+1.1% vs TC avg
§102
22.6%
-17.4% vs TC avg
§112
34.5%
-5.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1380 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to because the character of the lines, numbers, and letters are not sufficiently dense and dark, uniformly thick and well-defined as required by MPEP §608.02(V)(l). Figures 1-13 are of poor quality. See Figure 12 below as an example. PNG media_image1.png 352 642 media_image1.png Greyscale The examiner points out that the USPTO website has guidelines on how to submit drawing images for the best results. See https://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/efs-web-pdf-guidelines. Specifically, see the section which states: It is recommended to use images saved in a lossless format (e.g., TIFF, PNG, GIF, BMP). It is strongly recommended that the PDF creation software does not downsample images during the PDF creation process, as this could degrade the quality of the image. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claims 11-17 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claims 2-8. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claims 2-7 and 11-17 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. Claims 2, 11 and 19 recite “the contiguous connecting grooves”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Claims 3 and 12 recite “in a direction taking it gradually away”. The term “gradually” is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “gradually” is not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear which angles of oblique extension would be considered gradual, and which angles. Applicant should also avoid using pronouns in the claims to avoid clarity issues. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 8-10 and 18-20 are allowed. Claims 2-7 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 11-17 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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. Adachi JP 2004-332852 is the closest prior art reference. Adachi does not disclose the fixing hole extending obliquely with respect to an axial direction of the bearing ring. Adachi discloses parallel fixing holes. There would be no reason to modify Adachi to provide obliquely extending holes without impermissible hindsight reconstruction. Furthermore, the invention provides the feature for the specific purpose of providing better anti-shear performance. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN B WAITS whose telephone number is (571)270-3664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 6-4 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, John R Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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. /ALAN B WAITS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 15, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12747757
BEARING COMPONENT WITH PIEZOELECTRIC CORE
2y 1m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12736085
BEARING
2y 0m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12729722
BEARING UNIT
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12723627
ELECTROLYTIC CORROSION PREVENTION MEMBER FOR ROLLING BEARING AND ELECTROLYTIC CORROSION PREVENTION ROLLING BEARING UNIT
2y 2m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12723624
BEARING ASSEMBLY FOR VEHICLE
1y 10m to grant Granted Sep 01, 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 (+29.8%)
2y 5m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1380 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