Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/120,105

Recreational Personal Flotational Device

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 10, 2023
Examiner
BURGESS, MARC R
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
34%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
56%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 34% of cases
34%
Career Allow Rate
164 granted / 477 resolved
-17.6% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
69 currently pending
Career history
546
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
48.8%
+8.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.1%
-18.9% vs TC avg
§112
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 477 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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 2, 3, 5 and 7-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/11/25. Please note that while the original requirement for restriction identified the “cross” and “T” configurations as different inventions, upon further consideration the two shapes are deemed to be obvious variants. As such, both species A and B are being examined and claim 4 is rejoined. Please also note that while applicant identified claims 13 and 15 as reading on the elected invention, they both depend from claim 10, which is withdrawn (as it recites the connector of species C and D). Claims 13 and 15 are therefore withdrawn. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Greenan US 9,919,776. Regarding claim 1, Greenan discloses a recreational flotational device for a person, the device comprising: first elongated foam member 102 having buoyant properties; second elongated foam member 104 having buoyant properties and coupled to the first elongated foam member at a perpendicular angle; and wherein the first elongated foam member is configured for the person sitting astride thereof, with the second elongated foam member encircling the user's torso laterally. PNG media_image1.png 387 319 media_image1.png Greyscale Figure 1- Greenan Figure 4B Regarding claim 4, Greenan discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Greenan also discloses that the first 102 and second 104 elongated foam members are arranged in a cross-shaped configuration. 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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenan US 9,919,776. Regarding claim 6, Greenan discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Greenan does not teach that the first and second elongated foam members are coupled by one of an adhesive and a heat source, but does teach that the members can be joined permanently (column 3 line 66- column 4 line 5). The examiner is taking official notice that adhesives and heat are both well-known methods of joining foam members. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the floatation device of Greenan by permanently fixing the members with heat or adhesive in order to prevent inadvertent disassembly and enable more extreme usage. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenan US 9,919,776 in view of “Can you use Hot Glue on ‘pool noodles?’” from Hometalk (hereafter “Hometalk.” Regarding claim 6, Greenan discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Greenan does not teach that the first and second elongated foam members are coupled by one of an adhesive and a heat source, but does teach that the members can be joined permanently (column 3 line 66- column 4 line 5). Hometalk teaches that hot glue can be used to fix pool noodles (page 2, reply of 7/20/2018). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the floatation device of Greenan by permanently fixing the members with heat or adhesive as taught by Hometalk in order to prevent inadvertent disassembly and enable more extreme usage. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kremmer 2019/0001235 and Serrano US 9,115,839 teach connector systems for elongated foam members. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marc Burgess whose telephone number is (571)272-9385. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 08:30-15:00. 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 (Joseph) Morano can be reached at 517 272-6684. 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. /MARC BURGESS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 10, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12454342
ADAPTABLE THROTTLE UNITS FOR MARINE DRIVES AND METHODS FOR INSTALLING THEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
Patent 12356953
INTELLIGENT CAT LITTER BOX
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 15, 2025
Patent 11524761
STRINGER-FRAME INTERSECTION OF AIRCRAFT BODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 13, 2022
Patent 11240999
FISHING ROD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 08, 2022
Patent 11130565
ELECTRIC TORQUE ARM HELICOPTER WITH AUTOROTATION SAFETY LANDING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 28, 2021
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
34%
Grant Probability
56%
With Interview (+21.1%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 477 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month