Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 35/521,810

Arrangement of train interiors

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jun 18, 2024
Examiner
AMAN, ANNA KATHY
Art Unit
2973
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
Alstom Holdings
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
96%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 10m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 96% — above average
96%
Career Allow Rate
1078 granted / 1124 resolved
+35.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -2% lift
Without
With
+-1.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 10m
Avg Prosecution
4 currently pending
Career history
1128
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§102
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§112
88.2%
+48.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1124 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . DETAILED ACTION: FINAL REFUSAL Final Rejection Applicant's response and amendment, filed 6/24/2025, have been considered. The rejection of the claim, under 35 USC §112(a) and (b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 first and second paragraphs, as lacking enablement based on the originally filed disclosure is maintained. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The claim is AGAIN AND FINALLY REJECTED under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first and second paragraphs, as the claimed invention is not described in such full, clear, concise and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use the same, and fails 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. The claim is indefinite and nonenabling because the exact shape and appearance cannot be determined for the following reasons: Applicant has added a statement describing the broken lines and surface coloration as forming no part of the claimed design. Is applicant disclaiming the details shown in the different shades of gray and the broken lines? What is left of the claim? Or is applicant trying to state that the color shown isn’t claimed? Clarification is necessary. 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. If all the figures on a drawing sheet are canceled, a replacement sheet is not required. A marked-up copy of the drawing sheet (labeled as “Annotated Sheet”) including an annotation showing that all the figures on that drawing sheet have been canceled must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change to the drawings. 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. CONCLUSION The claim is FINALLY REJECTED under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first and second paragraphs. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANIA K AMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4515. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3pm. 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 Wierenga can be reached on 571-270-0216. 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. Please note that, at this time, the examiner is prohibited from initiating or returning international telephone calls. If applicant wishes to communicate by telephone, the examiner may be reached by email to arrange a time for applicant to initiate the telephone interview: anna.aman@uspto.gov. The merits of the application may not be discussed via email unless an appropriate authorization for email communication is placed in the U.S. application file at the USPTO. Replies to office actions may not be sent via email. For those applications where applicant wishes to communicate with the examiner via Internet communications, e.g., email or video conferencing tools, the following is a sample authorization form which may be used by applicant: "Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file." Please see MPEP 502.03 II (Article 5) for more details. Discussion of the Merits of the Case In any application not prosecuted by the inventor, a Power of Attorney (POA), filed with the USPTO in the specific case, is required whether or not attorney for the applicant has POA authority in a foreign IP office. Only US registered Practitioners (not foreign attorneys) may represent applicants before the USPTO. Legal entities must be represented by US registered Practitioners. Examiner may not discuss the merits or specifics of a case without a proper POA on file. The POA form submitted in the international phase is not effective for purposes of the US. The proper form is available at: https://www.uspto.gov/web/forms/sb0080.pdf When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence: When responding to an official correspondence issued by the USPTO, including refusals, Notice of Allowances, or Notice of Abandonments, please note the following: The USPTO transacts business in writing. Applicants may submit replies to Office actions only by: • Online via the USPTO's Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only) • https://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/efs-web-guidance-and-resources • Mail: Commissioner For Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450 • Mailing should be done sufficiently in advance to ensure the USPTO receipt prior to reply period expiration • Facsimile to the USPTO's Official Fax Number (571-273-8300) (Do Not Fax Formal Drawings) • Hand-carry to USPTO's Alexandria, Virginia Customer Service Window For additional information regarding responding to office actions see: https://www.uspto.gov/patents-maintaining-patent/responding-office-actions Note that correspondence received will appear in Public PAIR, which may be viewed by the applicant at: https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair /Ania Aman/Examiner, Art Unit 2914
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 18, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jun 24, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Jan 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1121126
Main body of immersion heater
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent D1114952
Pellet torch
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent D1107872
Main body of immersion heater
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent D1107873
Main body of immersion heater
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent D1107874
Main body of immersion heater
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
96%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (-1.5%)
1y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1124 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