Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/211,333

HARD FOLDING CAR COVER

Final Rejection §101§112§DP
Filed
May 19, 2025
Examiner
MORROW, JASON S
Art Unit
3612
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Tony Waygong Chiu
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
1166 granted / 1385 resolved
+32.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1420
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
33.3%
-6.7% vs TC avg
§102
34.4%
-5.6% vs TC avg
§112
27.9%
-12.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1385 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112 §DP
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 Objections Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 6, the word --fourth-- is misspelled as “forth”. Appropriate correction is required. Double Patenting A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claim 2 is provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 6 of copending Application No. 18/173,240 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented. Claim 7 is provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 7 of copending Application No. 18/173,240 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented. Claim 11 is provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 11 of copending Application No. 18/173,240 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented. 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. 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. Claims 2, 3, 5, and 7-11 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 2, line 23, applicant claims “the guide rail is provided with a guide rail notch”. However, in line 22, applicant claims “two guide rails”. Thus, it is unclear which guide rail is being referred to. It is suggested the language the phrase be changed to “each of the guide rails is provided with a guide rail notch”. Claim 10 recites the limitation "the steel wire" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3, 5, and 8-10 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. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 9/9/2025 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive. Applicant’s arguments did not adequately address the double patenting situation as detailed above. Additionally, some of the rejections of under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above were not addressed by either argument or amendment to the claims. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason S Morrow whose telephone number is (571)272-6663. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.. 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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at (571) 270-5500. 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. /JASON S MORROW/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612 October 7, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 19, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112, §DP
Sep 09, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §101, §112, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595002
VEHICLE CROSSMEMBER, VEHICLE COMPRISING SUCH A VEHICLE CROSSMEMBER, AND SET OF VEHICLE CROSSMEMBERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590484
WIRE ROPE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584340
PANEL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584344
MOTORIZED COVERING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583295
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR A VEHICLE ENCLOSURE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+10.8%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1385 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