Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 14, 2026
Application No. 35/526,635

Buckle

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Aug 29, 2025
Priority
Mar 14, 2025 — EU 015095416-0003
Examiner
CUSTER, KELLY A
Art Unit
2951
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
Calzaturificio S C A R P A S P A
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allowance Rate
13 granted / 13 resolved
+40.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
6 currently pending
Career history
16
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
53.3%
+13.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 13 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 . Claim Rejection – 35 USC 112 The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b), 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 regards as the invention. The claim is indefinite and non-enabling because the drawings and specification do not describe the claimed design such that the exact scope and appearance thereof can be determined, because FIGS. 1.1-1.3, 1.6, and 1.8 show interior claimed design elements which are unclear. Therefore, the appearance of these surfaces cannot be reproduced by one skilled in the art without resorting to conjecture. See image below, areas of concern are grayed out and identified with an arrow. PNG media_image1.png 1093 2522 media_image1.png Greyscale Applicant may attempt to overcome the rejection by showing the claimed design completely and consistently. In doing so, Applicant may amend the drawings in response to this Office action. If Applicant chooses to remove from the claim any elements or portions of the design that are considered indefinite and non-enabling, Applicant must reduce them to legible, properly spaced broken lines. Applicant must remove the surface shade lines from all unclaimed portions of the design. Applicant is cautioned that any drawing amendments must show the claimed design, and its corresponding details, completely and consistently throughout all of the views. Corrected Drawing Sheets Corrected drawing sheets are suggested in reply to the Office action. Any amended replacement drawings sheet should conform to the following guidelines: 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 drawings in compliance with the requirement therefor, care must be exercised to avoid introduction of anything which could be construed to be new matter prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121. REPLY GUIDELINES Signature required Applicant is reminded that any reply to this action must be signed either by a patent practitioner (i.e., a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office) or by the applicant. If the applicant is a juristic entity, the reply must be signed by a patent practitioner. See 37 CFR 1.33(b). Responding to official USPTO Correspondence The USPTO transacts business in writing. Applicants may submit replies to Office actions only by: Online via the USPTO Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only). See https://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/efs-web-guidance-and-resources By mail: Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450; By facsimile via the USPTO official fax number (571-273-8300); or By hand-carry to the USPTO Alexandria, Virginia, Customer Service Window. For more information, see https://www.uspto.gov/patents/maintain/responding-office-actions. Email communications Replies to Office actions may not be submitted via email. The merits of the application will not be discussed via email (or other electronic medium) unless appropriate authorization for internet communication is filed in the application. Form PTO/SB/439 “Authorization for Internet Communications in a Patent Application or Request to Withdraw Authorization for Internet Communications” may be used to provide such authorization and is available at the USPTO web page indicated above. The authorization may not be sent by email to the USPTO. See MPEP 502.03.II for further information. Discussions regarding the merits of an application All discussions between the applicant and the examiner regarding the merits of a pending application will be considered an interview and are to be made of record. See MPEP 713. The examiner will not discuss the merits of the application with applicant’s representative if the representative is not registered to practice before the USPTO. Appointment as applicant’s representative before the International Bureau pursuant to Rule 3 of the Common Regulations under the Hague Agreement does not entitle such representative to represent the applicant before the USPTO. Furthermore, an applicant that is a juristic entity must be represented by a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO. Telephonic or in-person interviews A telephonic or in person interview may only be conducted with an attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO (“registered practitioner”) or with a pro se applicant (an applicant who is the inventor and who is not represented by a registered practitioner). The registered practitioner may either be of record or not of record. To become “of record”, a power of attorney (POA) in accordance with 37 CFR 1.32 must be filed in the application. Form PTO/AIA /80 “Power of Attorney to Prosecute Applications Before the USPTO”, available at https://www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms-patent-applications-filed-or-after-september-16-2012, may be used for this purpose. See MPEP 402.02(a) for further information. A registered practitioner "not of record" must show authorization to conduct an interview by completing, signing and filing an “Applicant Initiated Interview Request Form” (PTOL-413A) (available at the USPTO web page indicated above). See MPEP 405 for further information. If a pro se applicant or registered practitioner located outside of the United States wishes to communicate by telephone, the examiner may be contacted directly via email to arrange a time and date for the telephone interview. When proposing an interview appointment, include proposed days and times for the proposed call, and confirm who will initiate the call. For the examiner’s work schedule, see Examiner Contact Information. Conclusion The claim stands rejected for the reasons set forth above. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art is considered pertinent based on similarities with the ornamental appearance of the claim. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kelly Custer whose telephone number is (703)756-1692. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 to noon, 1 to 5 EST. 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, Sandra Snapp, can be reached on (571) 272-8364. 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. /K.C./ Examiner, Art Unit 2914 /SANDRA SNAPP/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2914
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 29, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1132381
Sticker
1y 8m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent D1121672
Graphical user interface for interaction with a display screen panel
1y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent D1121031
Sticker
1y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent D1120976
Graphical user interface for interaction with a display screen panel
1y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent D1117330
Graphical user interface for interaction with a display screen panel
1y 4m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
3y 4m (~2y 5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 13 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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