Patentshell

For patent prosecution practices

The Office Action response, already formatted.

Upload the PDF. You get back a Word document with the caption block filled in, the claim listing built, and a Remarks heading waiting under every rejection and objection the examiner raised.

You still write the arguments.

No card required for the first one.

IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

In re Application of: Marguerite A. Okonkwo
Application No.: 17/482,913
Filed: September 23, 2021
For: Thermal Regulation System for Modular Battery Enclosures
Examiner: D. R. Whitfield
Art Unit: 2836
Confirmation No.: 4417
Docket No.: OKN-2021-004

AMENDMENT AND RESPONSE UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 1.111

AMENDMENTS TO THE CLAIMS

This listing of claims will replace all prior versions and listings of claims in the application:

1. (Currently Amended)

[Claim 1 text — show additions underlined and deletions in strikethrough]

6. (Currently Amended)

[Claim 6 text — show additions underlined and deletions in strikethrough]

8. (Previously Presented)

[Claim 8 text]

REMARKS

Claims 1-5, 7, 9-11 stand rejected. Reconsideration is respectfully requested in view of the following remarks.

Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 — Claims 1-5

The Examiner's position: Claims 1-5 are rejected as unpatentable over Halvorsen in view of Tanaka.

References applied: Halvorsen — US 10,847,312; Tanaka — US 2019/0221899

[Argument]

Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 — Claims 9-11

[The Office Action states no express reason to combine — confirm against the PDF]

Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) — Indefiniteness — Claim 7

The Examiner's position: the phrase "substantially thermally isolated" is a relative term for which the specification provides no standard of measurement.

[Argument]

Objection to the Claims — Claim 6

Real output. The highlighted text is where your attorney writes.

It takes about an hour, and it's the same hour every time.

Somebody reads the action, retypes the caption block, rebuilds the claim listing with the right status identifier on all of them, then lays out Remarks with a heading under each rejection. It has to be right and it takes real attention, but none of it is legal work. At paralegal rates, across a docket, it adds up.

That's the part we do.

How it works

01

Upload the Office Action

The PDF straight from Patent Center. Scans work too.

02

Check the extraction

Every rejection and objection is listed with the examiner's wording and the page it came from. Anything we're not sure about gets flagged so you can look.

03

Download the shell

A .docx with the caption block filled in, the claim listing built, and a Remarks heading under every rejection.

What you get

A heading under every rejection

§102, §103, §112(b), double patenting, and objections to the drawings or specification. Written description and enablement come through as separate grounds, not lumped together.

Status identifiers on every claim

Original, Currently Amended, Withdrawn, Canceled. Get one wrong and the amendment gets held non-compliant. It's an easy thing to do at 6pm.

The caption block

Application number, examiner, art unit, confirmation number, filing date. It also picks the right rule, §1.111 or §1.116, based on whether the action is final.

You can check every field

Every field shows the sentence it came from and the page number. We match those quotes back against the PDF and flag any we can't find.

Pricing

You pay per response. One Office Action, one document back.

All plans →

Solo

$199/mo

5 responses every month

$39.80 each

Practice

$699/mo

20 responses every month

$34.95 each

Firm

$2,400/mo

75 responses every month

$32 each

Questions

Does it write the arguments?
No. Anywhere judgment is needed you get a highlighted placeholder. That's on purpose. Nobody at your firm should have to defend an argument a piece of software wrote.
Does it track my response deadlines?
No. We show the shortened statutory period because the Office Action states it, but we don't calculate a due date or send reminders. Extensions, weekends and Track One all change the answer. Your docketing system already handles that, and it should keep handling it.
What happens to our client documents?
They stay in the US, in private storage, walled off per firm at the database level. We don't train models on them. You set how long we keep files, and every download is logged.
What if it misreads the Office Action?
You see every extracted field next to the examiner's own words and the page it came from, before anything is generated. We also check each quote back against the PDF and flag any we can't find. Nothing is filed without an attorney reading it.

Try it on one of your own.

The first one's free. Open the document it gives you and you'll know in about a minute whether it's worth it.

Try one free