Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/562,408

Polymer Composite Timber Pile and Methods

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 27, 2021
Examiner
TOLEDO-DURAN, EDWIN J
Art Unit
3678
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Strata Products Worldwide LLC
OA Round
6 (Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
530 granted / 766 resolved
+17.2% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+32.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
818
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
46.0%
+6.0% vs TC avg
§102
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
§112
22.4%
-17.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 766 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION In response to remarks filed on 3 December 2025 Status of Claims Claims 1-3 and 4-15 are pending; Claims 1, 6, 7 and 13 are currently amended; Claims 2, 3, 5 and 8-10 were previously presented; Claims 4, 11, 12, 14 and 15 are cancelled; Claims 1-3, 5-10 and 13 are rejected herein. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed on 3 December 2025 have been fully considered. Applicant’s argument about the Kawada and Cassidy references were not found persuasive as Kawada was provided to show that drilling holes in piles is well-known and Cassidy was provided to show that providing a polymer within holes in a pile is also well-known. King was provided to show that drilling holes in wood and filling them with a polymer is known. Trader was incorporated to show a wire around a pile. None of the secondary references have to show each and every single claim limitation of the claim. The terms “predetermined locations” or “prechosen locations” are broad enough to read on holes made by anyone at any moment in the past since the claim does not specify when they were made. The holes in Cassidy didn’t create themselves, they were made by someone at those predetermined locations in the past. Regarding the loads and displacement limitations, examiner contends that following codes and design standards in the design of structures to achieve a desired result is an obvious matter of design choice. Additionally, the claim limitations do not specify for what this pile system is being used for nor specifies how such load requirements and displacements are achieved. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1, 2, 6-10 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cassidy (U.S. Patent Application No. 2015/0117959) in view of Trader et al (U.S. Patent No. 6,536,991), Kawada (Japan Patent Publication No. 61102916) and King (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0372141). As to Claim 1, Cassidy discloses a support comprising: A timber pile (102; Paragraph 0045: “The collar 10 and the method of the present invention may be used with piles and/or extensions of timber, concrete, metal, or other structural materials”), the pile has voids (108) and holes (112) at predetermined locations (In order for voids 108 and bolt holes 112 to exist, it is inherent that they were created at that predetermined location at some point before in time); A sheath (10) positioned about the pile (102) and in spaced relation to the pile to define a gap (120) between the sheath and the pile; and A cured polymer (Paragraph 0009: “With the collar secured around the extension and pile, a flowable repair material, such as an epoxy or grout, is injected through one or more of the funnels in the collar, and manipulated such that it fills the gaps between the collar and the pile and extension. The repair material has a composition such that it hardens in place. In some embodiments, the repair material has a composition such that it flows into any gaps, spaces, or holes in the pile and extension, or gaps and spaces between the pile and extension, so as to fill such gaps, spaces, and holes”; Paragraph 0042: “The repair material 118 has such a composition that it hardens in place. While the repair material 118 is still flowable (i.e., before it hardens), it is manipulated into place by hand or by tools to fill the gap 120 from the lower end 20 of the collar 10 to the upper end 18 of the collar 10. The composition of the repair material 118 may be such that, while still in a flowable state, the repair material flows into any gaps, spaces, or holes in the pile 102, extension 104, or connection 106, so as to fill such gaps, spaces, or holes (e.g., bolt hole 112 or the hollowed-out space 108). When the repair material 118 has hardened, it provides structural strength to the marine support 100 by strengthening the pile 102 and/or extension 104, and the connection 106 between the pile 102 and the extension 104”) disposed between the sheath (10) and the pile (102) and disposed in the holes (112) and permeated into the pile into the voids (108) of the pile (Figure 12). However, Cassidy is silent about the pile wrapped with wire, the sheath positioned about the wire and the pile. Trader discloses a wooden pile (12, 43) wrapped with wire (33), and a sheath (26) positioned about the wire and the pile. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to wrap the pile with wire. The motivation would have been to provide reinforcements to the gap filled with repair material. Furthermore, Cassidy as modified (See above paragraph) about whether the holes are drill holes in the sense of being made by using a drill. Kawada discloses drilling holes (11; Abstract: “To increase the bearing capacity of the tip of a pile by inserting blocks and an expandible material into plural holes drilled in the peripheral side of the pile”) at predetermined locations in a pile (2) and a material (3) disposed in the drill holes. King discloses that it is known to drill a hole (Figure 4A) in a wood structure (114) and then adding an uncured polymer (116) to the drilled hole wherein the material sets in the drilled hole. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the pile with drill holes at predetermined locations and the cured polymer also disposed in the drill holes. The motivation would have been to increase the bearing capacity of the pile. Lastly, Cassidy as modified (See above paragraph) does not explicitly teach that the pile withstands loads between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS but not more than 300 KIPS and yields a displacement of less than 1.5 inches while under loads of between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it is well-known to design pile structures to withstand loads depending on the prospective use of the structure. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to design the pile to withstand loads between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS but not more than 300 KIPS and yields a displacement of less than 1.5 inches while under loads of between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS with the motivation of withstanding loads as deemed by project requirements. As to Claim 2, Cassidy as modified teaches the invention of Claim 13 (Refer to Claim 13 discussion). Cassidy as modified also teaches wherein the sheath (10) is a wire mesh or a sheet (10). As to Claim 6, Cassidy discloses a method for reinforcing a structure comprising the steps of: Creating holes (212) into prechosen locations (In order for voids 108 and bolt holes 112 to exist, it is inherent that they were created at that predetermined location at some point before in time) in a timber pile (102; Paragraph 0045: “The collar 10 and the method of the present invention may be used with piles and/or extensions of timber, concrete, metal, or other structural materials”); Moving the timber pile (102) to a desired position below the structure (104, 110); Positioning a sheath (10) about the pile and in spaced relation to the pile to define a gap (120) between the sheath and the pile, and Pouring a cured polymer so the cured polymer is disposed between the sheath and the pile and in the holes and permeated into voids of the pile (Paragraph 0009: “With the collar secured around the extension and pile, a flowable repair material, such as an epoxy or grout, is injected through one or more of the funnels in the collar, and manipulated such that it fills the gaps between the collar and the pile and extension. The repair material has a composition such that it hardens in place. In some embodiments, the repair material has a composition such that it flows into any gaps, spaces, or holes in the pile and extension, or gaps and spaces between the pile and extension, so as to fill such gaps, spaces, and holes”; Paragraph 0042: “The repair material 118 has such a composition that it hardens in place. While the repair material 118 is still flowable (i.e., before it hardens), it is manipulated into place by hand or by tools to fill the gap 120 from the lower end 20 of the collar 10 to the upper end 18 of the collar 10. The composition of the repair material 118 may be such that, while still in a flowable state, the repair material flows into any gaps, spaces, or holes in the pile 102, extension 104, or connection 106, so as to fill such gaps, spaces, or holes (e.g., bolt hole 112 or the hollowed-out space 108). When the repair material 118 has hardened, it provides structural strength to the marine support 100 by strengthening the pile 102 and/or extension 104, and the connection 106 between the pile 102 and the extension 104”); and Placing the support upright below the structure (104, 110). However, Cassidy is silent about wrapping wire about the pile, positioning the sheath about the wire and the pile. Trader discloses a wooden pile (12, 43) wrapped with wire (33), and a sheath (26) positioned about the wire and the pile. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to wrap the pile with wire. The motivation would have been to provide reinforcements to the gap filled with repair material. Furthermore, Cassidy as modified (See above paragraph) about whether the holes are drill holes in the sense of being made by using a drill. Kawada discloses drilling holes (11; Abstract: “To increase the bearing capacity of the tip of a pile by inserting blocks and an expandible material into plural holes drilled in the peripheral side of the pile”) at predetermined locations in a pile (2) and a material (3) disposed in the drill holes. King discloses that it is known to drill a hole (Figure 4A) in a wood structure (114) and then adding an uncured polymer (116) to the drilled hole wherein the material sets in the drilled hole. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the pile with drill holes at predetermined locations and the cured polymer also disposed in the drill holes. The motivation would have been to increase the bearing capacity of the pile. Lastly, Cassidy as modified (See above paragraph) does not explicitly teach that the pile withstands loads between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS but not more than 300 KIPS and yields a displacement of less than 1.5 inches while under loads of between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it is well-known to design pile structures to withstand loads depending on the prospective use of the structure. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to design the pile to withstand loads between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS but not more than 300 KIPS and yields a displacement of less than 1.5 inches while under loads of between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS with the motivation of withstanding loads as deemed by project requirements. As to Claim 7, Cassidy discloses a method for building a support for a structure comprising the steps of: Placing a sheath (10) about a timber pile (102; Paragraph 0045: “The collar 10 and the method of the present invention may be used with piles and/or extensions of timber, concrete, metal, or other structural materials”) so a gap (342) is defined between the sheath (10) and the pile (102) to create a reinforced timber pile; Creating holes (112) in the pile (102); Filling the gap (120) between the sheath and the pile with a polymer (Paragraph 0009: “With the collar secured around the extension and pile, a flowable repair material, such as an epoxy or grout, is injected through one or more of the funnels in the collar, and manipulated such that it fills the gaps between the collar and the pile and extension. The repair material has a composition such that it hardens in place. In some embodiments, the repair material has a composition such that it flows into any gaps, spaces, or holes in the pile and extension, or gaps and spaces between the pile and extension, so as to fill such gaps, spaces, and holes”; Paragraph 0042: “The repair material 118 has such a composition that it hardens in place. While the repair material 118 is still flowable (i.e., before it hardens), it is manipulated into place by hand or by tools to fill the gap 120 from the lower end 20 of the collar 10 to the upper end 18 of the collar 10. The composition of the repair material 118 may be such that, while still in a flowable state, the repair material flows into any gaps, spaces, or holes in the pile 102, extension 104, or connection 106, so as to fill such gaps, spaces, or holes (e.g., bolt hole 112 or the hollowed-out space 108). When the repair material 118 has hardened, it provides structural strength to the marine support 100 by strengthening the pile 102 and/or extension 104, and the connection 106 between the pile 102 and the extension 104”); Allowing the polymer to permeate into the voids (108) of the pile and the holes (112); and Letting the polymer cure (Paragraph 0009: “With the collar secured around the extension and pile, a flowable repair material, such as an epoxy or grout, is injected through one or more of the funnels in the collar, and manipulated such that it fills the gaps between the collar and the pile and extension. The repair material has a composition such that it hardens in place). However, Cassidy is silent about the pile wrapped with wire, the sheath positioned about the wire and the pile. Trader discloses a wooden pile (12, 43) wrapped with wire (33), and a sheath (26) positioned about the wire and the pile. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to wrap the pile with wire. The motivation would have been to provide reinforcements to the gap filled with repair material. Furthermore, Cassidy as modified (See above paragraph) about whether the holes are drill holes in the sense of being made by using a drill. Kawada discloses drilling holes (11; Abstract: “To increase the bearing capacity of the tip of a pile by inserting blocks and an expandible material into plural holes drilled in the peripheral side of the pile”) at predetermined locations in a pile (2) and a material (3) disposed in the drill holes. King discloses that it is known to drill a hole (Figure 4A) in a wood structure (114) and then adding an uncured polymer (116) to the drilled hole wherein the material sets in the drilled hole. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the pile with drill holes at predetermined locations and the cured polymer also disposed in the drill holes. The motivation would have been to increase the bearing capacity of the pile. Lastly, Cassidy as modified (See above paragraph) does not explicitly teach that the pile withstands loads between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS but not more than 300 KIPS and yields a displacement of less than 1.5 inches while under loads of between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it is well-known to design pile structures to withstand loads depending on the prospective use of the structure. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to design the pile to withstand loads between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS but not more than 300 KIPS and yields a displacement of less than 1.5 inches while under loads of between 150 KIPS and 300 KIPS with the motivation of withstanding loads as deemed by project requirements. As to Claim 8, Cassidy as modified teaches the invention of Claim 7 (Refer to Claim 7 discussion). Cassidy as modified also teaches including the step of positioning a form (Cassidy: 104) about the reinforced timber pile (Cassidy: 102). As to Claim 9, Cassidy as modified teaches the invention of Claim 8 (Refer to Claim 8 discussion). Cassidy as modified also teaches wherein the placing step includes the step of placing the sheath (Cassidy: 10) about the timber pile (Cassidy: 102) while the timber pile is in place supporting the structure. As to Claim 10, Cassidy as modified teaches the invention of Claim 5 (Refer to Claim 5 discussion). Cassidy as modified also teaches wherein the pile (Cassidy: 102) is supporting a vertical load (Cassidy: Load produced by 104). As to Claim 13, Cassidy as modified teaches the invention of Claim 12 (Refer to Claim 12 discussion). Cassidy as modified also teaches wherein the drill holes (Cassidy: 112) extend through the cross-section of the pile. Claims 3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cassidy (U.S. Patent Application No. 2015/0117959) in view of Trader et al (U.S. Patent No. 6,536,991), Kawada (Japan Patent Publication No. 61102916) and King (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0372141); and further in view of Ehsani (U.S. Patent No. 8,650,831). As to Claim 3, Cassidy as modified teaches the invention of Claim 2 (Refer to Claim 2 discussion). However, Cassidy as modified is silent about metal bars disposed between the pile and the sheath and in the cured polymer. Ehsani discloses including metal bars (210) disposed between the pile and the sheath and in the cured polymer. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide metal bars disposed between the pile and the sheath and in the cured polymer. The motivation would have been to maintain a gap between the sheath and pile. As to Claim 5, Cassidy as modified teaches the invention of Claim 3 (Refer to Claim 3 discussion). However, Cassidy as modified is silent about spacers disposed between the pile and the sheath. Ehsani discloses including spacers (340) disposed between the pile and the sheath. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide spacers disposed between the pile and the sheath. The motivation would have been to maintain a gap between the sheath and pile. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 10:00AM to 6:00PM 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, AMBER ANDERSON can be reached at (571) 270-5281. 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. /EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 27, 2021
Application Filed
Dec 08, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 15, 2023
Response Filed
Aug 21, 2023
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 24, 2024
Notice of Allowance
Apr 24, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 25, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
May 15, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 21, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 21, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
May 27, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 30, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 03, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595634
FORMWORK DEVICE EQUIPPED WITH A DEVIATION-MEASURING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577748
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR OPTIMIZING REGULATION OF RESERVOIR SEDIMENT DISCHARGING BASED ON ASYNCHRONOUS PROPAGATION CHARACTERISTIC BETWEEN FLOOD PEAK AND SEDIMENT PEAK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571286
UMBILICAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559901
IMPLEMENT AND A METHOD FOR OBTAINING INFORMATION RELATED TO SAID IMPLEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12545827
COMBINED TREATMENT PROCESS FOR REMOVING AND INHIBITING SCALE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
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

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+32.9%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 766 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