Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 19/228,311

MULTIPURPOSE RECONFIGURABLE DOORBELL GUARD APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 04, 2025
Examiner
DUNN, DAVID R
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
25%
Grant Probability
At Risk
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
56%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 25% of cases
25%
Career Allow Rate
57 granted / 229 resolved
-27.1% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+30.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
244
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
44.3%
+4.3% vs TC avg
§102
30.1%
-9.9% vs TC avg
§112
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 229 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Terminal Disclaimer The terminal disclaimer filed on 10/22/2025 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of 12,347,345 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded. 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 1-9 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. Claim 1 is directed to a “doorbell guide apparatus” that solely comprises a “sign” and no other elements; all that follows are part of the “sign”. The claim then defines what makes up the sign; the sign is claimed to have a hinge, in which said “hinge” is “configured to interface with the sign”. It is unclear how the hinge, which is part of the sign, can then be configured to interface with itself, since it is already part of the sign itself. As such, it is unclear what the hinge is “configured to interface” with. Additional claims introduce further indefiniteness, such as claim 2- it is unclear how the sign, which includes a hinge (which has the second end), can be removably interfaced with itself. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 (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. Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mathers et al. (5,077,452). Regarding claim 1, Mathers et al. discloses a reconfigurable doorbell guide apparatus, comprising: a sign (“A”; see Fig. 2), having: a body (18) having a plurality of surfaces; an anchoring part configured to mount to a structure in a plurality of orientations, the anchoring part having: a backing plate (B), the backing plate having a flat fastener (D; see Fig. 4, fastener D is flat as looking into the paper in the view of Fig. 4) disposed on a first surface thereof; and a hinge (32), having: a first end (side of 28) configured to interface with the backing plate, and a second end (other side nearest 18) configured to interface with the sign. Regarding claim 2, the second end is configured to removeably interface with the sign (as best understood in light of the above indefiniteness, the hinge portion could be removed from the sign). Regarding claim 3, the “sign” 18, can pivot with the hinge. Regarding claim 6, the sign further comprises: at least one mount (C) on a first end of the sign, with at least one pin (40). Regarding claim 7, an attachment interface (C) can receive the hinge in a plurality of orientations (i.e., the orientations in Fig. 4) 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(s) 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mathers et al. (5,077,452) alone. Regarding claim 4, Mathers is discussed above but does not show the fastener being tape, glue or hook and look. However, as all of these fasteners are old and well known in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use a tape, glue or hook and loop fastener rather than the clamp, or in addition to the clamp of Mathers in order to more easily attach the sign. Regarding claim 5, Mathers is discussed above but is silent on the materials of construction. However, the selection of a known material involves only routine skill in the art, and as such it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to make the sign and hinge from plastic and the attachment interface from polycarbonate plastic in order to provide durable yet inexpensive materials. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 8 and 9 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID R DUNN whose telephone number is (571)272-6670. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:00. 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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at 571-272-8105. 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. /DAVID R DUNN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 04, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Oct 22, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599254
IMAGE DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590728
MODULAR FLOOR CASSETTE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583372
POSTURE SUPPORT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12515569
POWER ARM REST FOR VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12495743
GRAIN BIN CONDITIONING SYSTEM USING HEADSPACE AIR
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
25%
Grant Probability
56%
With Interview (+30.7%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 229 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