Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/951,228

CONTROL OF A WATERCRAFT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 23, 2022
Examiner
VASUDEVA, AJAY
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Jetworx GmbH
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
550 granted / 783 resolved
+18.2% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
807
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§102
28.4%
-11.6% vs TC avg
§112
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 783 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Second Non-Final Rejection A further consideration has resulted in this Office Action being a second non-final rejection based on new grounds. The examiner regrets the resulting inconvenience to the applicant and their counsel. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 10-13 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ostanin et al. (US 11,459,068 B2). Regarding claim 10, it is noted that claim does not positively recite any connection with a stern module, but rather sets forth the stern module merely in terms of a capability statement. In the present case, Ostanin et al. disclose a surfboard that, in entirety, is considered to be a bow module. Any part of the surfboard – such as the connector [102], the fin or the fin box – can be broadly considered as a connection portion, which would be capable of being connected to, and therefore configured to connect to a stern module of another watercraft. A remote control operated by an operator is configured to transfer movement control signals to a controller [304, 311] for operating a motor drive (col. 2, lines 39-46; and col. 5, lines 49-51). A receiver in the form of an antenna [309] is configured to wirelessly receive control signals from the remote control (col. 5, lines 65-67). The receiver is located at a distance from and connected to a transmitter [308] by a cable (col. 4, lines 45-52). The transmitter is connected to the remote control and configured to transmit the movement control signals received from the remote control on to the controller. Re claim 11, because the transmitter is in the form of a radio transceiver, it is capable of, and therefore configured for wirelessly transmitting the movement control signals to any stern module. Re claim 12, the connection between the remote control and the transmitter is at least partially wired. Re claim 13, the remote control is releasably fixed to the bow module (see col. 2, lines 40-42). Re claim 15, a power supply [301] in the form of a battery supplies power to one or more of the transmitter and the receiver. Re claim 16, the battery is charged using a charging port [314], implying that the battery is a rechargeable battery (Fig 3a; col. 5, lines 49-51) 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. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ostanin et al. (US 11,459,068 B2) in view of WO 2013191501 A1 ('501), as cited by the applicant. Ostanin et al. disclose a watercraft module comprising a rechargeable battery, but fails to disclose a solar cell for charging the rechargeable battery. WO '501 discloses a watercraft comprising a rechargeable battery [22], wherein a solar cell [21] is attached to the bow module for charging the rechargeable battery. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the module of Ostanin et al. with a solar cell, as taught by WO '501. Having such an arrangement would have provided an environment-friendly solution to recharge and extend the operational time and range of the battery. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-5 and 7-9 are allowed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 10/02/2025 have been considered but they are moot in view of new ground of rejection. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Weisenburger (US 11180224) shows a watercraft having a transmitter and receiver. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AJAY VASUDEVA whose telephone number is (571)272-6689. The examiner can normally be reached 6:00 am - 3:00 pm. 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, Samuel J. Morano can be reached at 571-272-6684. 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. /AJAY VASUDEVA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 23, 2022
Application Filed
May 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 02, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12564177
VARIABLE BUOYANCY PLATFORM FOR AQUACULTURE FARMING AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12528561
SAFETY STRUT ASSEMBLY FOR HYDROFOIL CRAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12528565
INFLATABLE TOROIDAL POLYHEDRON BUOYANCY TUBE FOR A LIFE RAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12522326
ENERGY HARVESTING VESSELS WITH MODULAR HULLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12522330
Systems and Methods For The Modular Attachment Of Additively Manufactured Components On Vehicles
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+23.0%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 783 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