Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 35/523,092

Salad Spinner

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 25, 2024
Examiner
ALDIN, OLIVIA H
Art Unit
2936
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
dk household brands Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allow Rate
53 granted / 53 resolved
+40.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 9m
Avg Prosecution
2 currently pending
Career history
55
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§102
21.3%
-18.7% vs TC avg
§112
64.0%
+24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 53 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 . INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE This application incorporates by reference the benefit of International Application No. EM015048816-0011, filed on January 26, 2024. ELECTION ACKNOWLEDGED Applicant’s election of Group II Reproductions 2.1-5.7 for further prosecution herein and concurrent amendment cancelling the non-elected Groups is acknowledged. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed 11/04/2025. OBJECTIONS Specification The specification is objected to because the FIG. descriptions were renumbered based on the restriction requirement. 37 C.F.R. 1.1026 Reproductions “If designs are cancelled, for example, as a result of a restriction requirement, applicants should not renumber the figures of the remaining design(s)”. All reproductions should be returned to their numbering in original filing 11/29/2024. The title of the design identifies the article in which the design is embodied by the name generally known and used by the public and may contribute to defining the scope of the claim (MPEP 1503.01). The examiner objects to the title because it is not referred to consistently throughout the specification. In some places it is “Jar Opener”, in others it is “Salad Spinner” The following title is suggested: --Salad Spinner-- Or another title as appropriate. The title must be amended throughout the application, original oath or declaration excepted. Drawings The drawings are objected to because they were renumbered based on the restriction requirement. 37 C.F.R. 1.1026 Reproductions “If designs are cancelled, for example, as a result of a restriction requirement, applicants should not renumber the figures of the remaining design(s)”. All reproductions should be returned to their numbering in original filing 11/29/2024. CLAIM REJECTION The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 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 non-enabling because the visual disclosure of the claimed design as originally filed is of such poor quality that its overall shape and appearance cannot be understood (MPEP § 1504.04), specifically: In the replacement drawings the quality of drawings has deteriorated to the point of changing/distorting the shape of the design and of obscuring detail in the colored drawings this effects all drawings 1.1-4.7. Below annotates a few examples only, the onus is on applicant to review all drawings for these issues. Examiner recommends returning to the original drawings of the elected group as filed and numbered. PNG media_image1.png 457 668 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 374 708 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 407 699 media_image3.png Greyscale Because of the inadequate disclosure the claimed design is in fact subject to multiple interpretations, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to make and use the design without the use of conjecture. This renders the claim indefinite and non-enabled. To overcome this rejection, it is suggested that applicant submit new drawings of the claimed design that show the design clearly and consistently. If certain non-enabled portions of the design cannot be fully enabled without the introduction of new matter, applicant may remove from the claim the areas or portions of the design that are considered indefinite and non-enabled, by converting them to broken line and amending the specification to indicate those portions form no part of the claimed design. Replacement drawings, 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. Avoidance of new matter 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). References cited The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. CONCLUSION Accordingly, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLIVIA ALDIN whose telephone number is (703)756-1468. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 M-F. 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, Barbara Fox can be reached at (571)272-4456. 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. /O.H.A./Examiner, Art Unit 2936 /CALVIN E VANSANT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2937
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 25, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Apr 06, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1114612
Pole clip
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent D1111741
Retractable ratchet tie-down
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent D1104725
BOAT ANCHOR HOOK
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1104735
WASHER
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1104696
Handle Comfort Ring
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
1y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 53 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