Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/671,179

Modular Precast Concrete Water Storage Device and System

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Feb 14, 2022
Examiner
SADLON, JOSEPH
Art Unit
3635
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Innovative Design Solutions LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
477 granted / 756 resolved
+11.1% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
797
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.2%
+5.2% vs TC avg
§102
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
§112
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 756 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE This communication is a first Office Action on the Merits. Claims 1-2, 4-15, as originally filed 21 NOV. 2025, are pending and have been considered as follows: Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 21 NOV. 25 has been entered. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claim 1-2, 4-15 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-8 of U.S. Patent No. US 11536017 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the limitations in the present case are contained within the claims of the issued patents. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 1-2, 4-15 will be allowed once a timely filed terminal disclaimer is approved. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). Reasons for allowance The claims would be allowable over the prior art because of the combination of limitations as specifically set forth and claimed in applicant’s claim(s), namely the inclusion of a linear footings keyed to specifically receive —i.e. register and mate— with one or both of a bottom of a pair of tapered walls, said tapered walls supporting a slab. Although some/all of the elements may be taught in the references of record, the examiner believes that the combination of all of the elements as specifically claimed would not have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art without relying on hindsight. Thus, the claims are allowable over the prior art references of record. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH J SADLON whose telephone number is (571)270-5730. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8AM-5PM. 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, BRIAN D MATTEI can be reached on (571)270-3238. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JJS/ /BRIAN D MATTEI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 14, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 04, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Dec 10, 2024
Response Filed
Mar 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §DP
Nov 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 09, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601174
Load Bearing Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595658
TILE AND SUPPORT STRUCTURE FOR VERTICAL MOUNTING TILES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577773
MODULAR DECKING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577776
Interlocking Composite Construction Block
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571198
VERTICAL TOOL SHED
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+26.8%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 756 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