Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 35/522,514

Handbag

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Sep 30, 2023
Examiner
BRODOWSKI, SAMANTHA LYNNE
Art Unit
2913
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
Caroline Bures
OA Round
2 (Final)
96%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 96% — above average
96%
Career Allow Rate
243 granted / 253 resolved
+36.0% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-0.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
4 currently pending
Career history
257
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§102
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
§112
72.2%
+32.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 253 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
FINAL ACTION General Information The merits of this case have been carefully examined again in light of Applicant's response received 8/29/2025. The rejection of record under 35 USC § 112 (a) and (b) has not been overcome by Applicant's amendment and is hereby repeated and made FINAL. In addition, Applicant's amendment has introduced impermissible new matter into the claim and necessitates the FINAL rejection under 35 USC § 112(a) set forth below. Additionally, in the request for reconsideration filed 8/29/2025, Applicant states “Regarding Figure 1.11 … Should the USPTO consider it clearer, I would be willing to remove this figure” but this figure has not actually been canceled by the Applicant. Applicant must respond definitively as if 1.11 is canceled, as the Examiner cannot make that decision for the Applicant. If 1.11 is canceled, 1.12 should be renumbered as 1.11. The Examiner is able to amend the figure descriptions in the specification for the Applicant based on the remarks filed, but is not able to make any amendments to the drawing sheets, including the figure numbering. Drawings The drawings are objected to for the following reason/s: The amended reproductions received on 8/29/2025 are objected to because: A. Explanatory text and/or legends are present in the representations (Hague Administrative Instructions Section 402(c)(ii)). B. The reproductions have not been submitted in ascending numerical order (Hague Administrative Instructions Section 405(b)). See 37 CFR 1.1026. The drawings should be submitted on separate sheets from the descriptions of the reproductions, which should be placed in the specification and not on the drawing sheets themselves. The drawing sheets should be limited to only the drawings and their figure number, and submitted in ascending numerical order. 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. 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. When preparing new or replacement drawings, be careful to avoid introducing new matter. New matter is prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f). Claim FINAL Rejection- 35 USC §112 (a) New Matter The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a), as failing to comply with the description requirement thereof since the new drawings introduce new matter not supported by the original disclosure. The original disclosure does not reasonably convey to a designer of ordinary skill in the art that applicant was in possession of the design now claimed at the time the application was filed. See In re Daniels, 144 F.3d 1452, 46 USPQ2d 1788 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Rasmussen, 650 F.2d 1212, 211 USPQ 323 (CCPA 1981). Specifically, there is no support in the original disclosure for the appearance of the “stitching” on the sides of the tabs that affix the handle to the bag as shown in replacement figures 1.3 and 1.4. In original figures 1.3 and 1.4, are horizontal line was shown in these locations which traveled across the entire width of the folded over tabs. In the replacement figures, these horizontal lines (which represent “stitching” as stated by the Applicant) have been shortened and do not travel across the entire width. This is considered a new appearance. For example, see below: PNG media_image1.png 583 997 media_image1.png Greyscale This appearance is also inconsistent with figure 1.10, which does not show any horizontal lines in these areas. See below: PNG media_image2.png 734 887 media_image2.png Greyscale To overcome this rejection, applicant may: Amend replacement figures 1.3, 1.4, and original 1.10 to all show horizontal “stitching” lines that travel across the entire width, as was shown in original figures 1.3 and 1.4. OR Amend replacement figures 1.3 and 1.4 to remove the horizontal “stitching” lines for consistency with original figure 1.10. A response is required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. If corrected drawings are submitted in response to this Office action, they must comply with 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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 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. The references cited but not applied are considered cumulative art related to the claimed design. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Samantha L Brodowski whose telephone number is (571)272-9142. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM-5:00 PM. 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, Shannon Morgan can be reached on (571)272-7979. 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. /S.L.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 2915 /JAE LIANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2932
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 30, 2023
Application Filed
May 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Aug 05, 2025
Interview Requested
Aug 13, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 29, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 12, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Feb 17, 2026
Interview Requested
Feb 26, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 07, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1115321
Handbag
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent D1115319
Bag
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent D1111423
Bag
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent D1111430
Bag
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent D1104461
HANDBAG
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 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
95%
With Interview (-0.8%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 253 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