Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 35/526,788

Watch case

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Sep 10, 2025
Priority
Mar 24, 2025 — CH CH2025-00135
Examiner
GLENNON, KATHERINE A
Art Unit
2951
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
Furlan Marri SA
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
96%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 96% — above average
96%
Career Allowance Rate
684 granted / 713 resolved
+35.9% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 9m
Avg Prosecution
6 currently pending
Career history
717
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
§102
11.3%
-28.7% vs TC avg
§112
77.4%
+37.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 713 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(a) and (b) The claim is 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 regards as the invention. The claim is indefinite and nonenabling because the precise configuration of the claimed design cannot be determined given a careful study of the drawing disclosure. The appearance of features on the back of the design identified in annotated images below is uncertain because the depth and configuration of these surfaces, and their relationship to adjacent surfaces, is not disclosed. Specifically: The second ring from the central circle. See arrow A. The two segments adjacent to ring A. See arrow B. The small segments adjacent to the outer edge of the four lug elements. See arrow C. The two outermost ring segments positioned between the lugs. See arrow D. The two second-most outer ring segments positioned between the lugs. See arrow E. The linear feature positioned between the lugs in 1.6. See arrow F. The central circle, where it is unclear if the surface of the feature is planar with the outer edge of the circle or if it’s surface may be recessed. See arrow G. The features considered nonenabled in the views below are shown shaded by the examiner for ease of illustration. PNG media_image1.png 744 626 media_image1.png Greyscale Therefore, the claim is not enabled because the appearance of the design is not certain. Without a firm understanding of what is claimed, the appearance of the design sought to be patented is left to conjecture. The claim is indefinite because without a clear understanding of the design, the claim is broadened to include undefined types and numbers of other designs that cannot be determined from the drawings. Suggestion To Overcome the Rejection Applicant may indicate that protection is not sought for those portions of the reproductions which are considered indefinite and nonenabling in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 above by amending the reproductions to color those portions or convert those portions to broken lines and by amending the specification to include a statement that the portions of the watch case shown in broken lines form no part of the claimed design or a statement that the portions of the watch case shown by coloring form no part of the claimed design provided such amendments do not introduce new matter (see 35 U.S.C. 132, 37 CFR 1.121). CONCLUSION The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) and (b). Reply Reminder Applicant is reminded that any reply to this refusal 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). Notes on Correspondence for Discussion of the Merits of the 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. Additional information regarding interviews is set forth below. 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/patents/apply/forms, may be used for this purpose. See MPEP 402.02(a) for further information. Interviews may also be conducted with a registered practitioner not of record provided the registered practitioner can 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 acceptable ways to submit forms to the USPTO see “When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence” below. Email Communications 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. For acceptable ways to submit the authorization form to the USPTO, see “When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence” below. See MPEP 502.03 II for further information. When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence When responding to official correspondence issued by the USPTO, including a notification of refusal, please note the following: The USPTO transacts business in writing. All replies must be signed in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33(b). Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.33(b)(3), a reply submitted on behalf of a juristic applicant must be signed by an attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO. Applicants may submit replies to Office actions only by: Online via the USPTO's Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only), at: https://uspto.gov/patents/apply Mail: Commissioner For Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450 Facsimile to the USPTO's Official Fax Number (571-273-8300) Hand-carry to USPTO's Alexandria, Virginia Customer Service Window. For further information please visit: https://www.uspto.gov/patents/maintain/responding-office-actions Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Katherine Glennon whose telephone number is 571-270-1559. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday between 9AM-5PM ET. 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 at 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. For more information about Patent Center, visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center. For information about filing in DOCX format, visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx. 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. /KATHERINE GLENNON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2914
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 10, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1131242
Watch case
1y 5m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent D1131243
Watch case
1y 5m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent D1131240
Wall clock
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent D1131265
Watch dial with hands
1y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent D1128475
Watch
1y 3m to grant Granted Jun 02, 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
96%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+2.8%)
1y 9m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 713 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