Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 35/522,912

Part of sock

Final Rejection §112
Filed
May 14, 2024
Examiner
BROWN-LORRIG, CHRISTEN PILAR
Art Unit
2912
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
X-Technology Swiss GmbH
OA Round
1 (Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
1y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allow Rate
64 granted / 64 resolved
+40.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 6m
Avg Prosecution
0 currently pending
Career history
64
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§102
9.6%
-30.4% vs TC avg
§112
90.4%
+50.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 64 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 . The amendments and drawings received 09 March 2026 are acknowledged. The applicants’ amendments and drawings have been carefully considered, and while most of the drawing objections and the specification objection of the previous office action, dated 09 December 2025, have been overcome due to applicants’ amendments, applicant has created one issue in regards to the drawings. Furthermore, the examiner has erroneously missed a title objection that was not addressed in the previous office action, dated 09 December 2025. A drawing rejection is listed below since the drawings now include an issue affecting the enablement and definiteness of the disclosure and a title, specification, and claim objection. Therefore, the applicant is receiving a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a)&(b) which is made final as follows. Objections to the Title, Specification, and Claim The title “Part of Sock” is objectionable because, “part of” sock is not considered an identifiable object of manufacture, and, as such, is not an appropriate title in a design application. The title must be amended throughout the application, original oath/declaration excepted, to read as the following: --- Sock --- Final Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112, (a) and (b) In view review of the drawings submitted on 09 March 2026, the claim is again and FINALLY REJECTED under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) and (b) or 35 U.S.C. 112, first and second paragraphs, (pre-AIA ), 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 applicant regards as the invention. Applicant is advised that there is no support in the original disclosure to allow one skilled in the art to extract the information provided in the new Figure 39.1 view. The newly introduced shapes and proportions relative to surrounding features are not present in the previously disclosed figure views. In an attempt to overcome the previous drawing objections, applicant has removed a portion of the sock design that was present in the original drawing disclosure but is not shown in the revised drawing disclosure in FIG. 39.1. Therefore, the revised drawing set now shows a design that was not present in the original disclosure. The changes now include altered shapes and configurations that cannot be reconciled with the understanding of the design as presented in the original drawing set. PNG media_image1.png 812 702 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 780 631 media_image2.png Greyscale While the application contains drawings of the invention in multiple views, the insufficient disclosures require the examiner to rely on conjecture to understand the intention of the applicant. For the disclosure to be considered definite and enabled, portions of the design considered insufficiently disclosed may be removed from the claim by conversion to broken lines or as defined by a broken line boundary with all shading/contour lines removed. Applicant is cautioned, however, that removal of random items from the claim could introduce new matter if the resulting claimed design was not evident within the originally filed drawings. 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). Corrected drawing sheets are suggested 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.” 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 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. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christen P. Brown-Lorrig whose telephone number is (571)272-2986. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9am to 5pm. 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, Michelle Wilson can be reached at (571) 272-7639. 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. /C.P.B./ Examiner Art Unit 2912 /MICHELLE E. WILSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2912
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 14, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 09, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 30, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1111343
Mule
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent D1108125
Lace tightening device dial
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent D1104446
ANKLE PROTECTIVE SOCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1104444
SHOE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1104422
SANDAL
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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
1y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 64 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