Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/209,480

PERSONAL WATERCRAFT

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jun 14, 2023
Examiner
VENNE, DANIEL V
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Kawasaki Motors Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
1162 granted / 1635 resolved
+19.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
1686
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
31.1%
-8.9% vs TC avg
§102
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
§112
43.8%
+3.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1635 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . An amendment was filed by applicant on 01/12/2026. Claims 1-15 are amended. Claims 16-18 are new. 5. Claims 1-18 are remaining in the application. Drawings 6. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed feature limitation: “positioning part” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Appropriate correction is required. Applicant states that the positioning part corresponds to flat plate part 63A; however, the claims recite positioning part and not flat plate part as is disclosed; therefore, the claims should be amended such that the claimed feature matches that disclosed. Similar applies to newly claimed feature guard where recited, which does not match the disclosure. In addition, similar applies to the claimed “fixing element” which is not found in the Specification. 7. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the above feature(s) consistent with the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 8. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. No new matter should be entered. 9. In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Certain claimed features (as identified in paragraph 6 of this Office Action) do not match the same features as disclosed. Claimed features should be consistent with features found in and described in the Specification. In addition, terminology and/or nomenclature should be consistent throughout the disclosure, including Abstract, Specification and Claims. Appropriate correction is required. The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: In addition to the terms identified above in paragraph 14 of this OA, the claimed features “buoyant foam”, “buoyant foam structures”, “fixing element” and “part higher than a height of the sonar” cannot be found in the Specification as are newly recited in the claims. Claimed features should be consistent with features found in and described in the Specification. In addition, terminology and/or nomenclature should be consistent throughout the disclosure, including Abstract, Specification and Claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claims 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention. The newly claimed feature limitations “fixing element” and “part higher than a height of the sonar” are not clear regarding requisite material and/or structure in light of the Specification, since such cannot be found nor are described in the Specification as are recited in the claims. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-13 and 15-17 are allowed. Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action. Claim 14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 18. 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. 19. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL V VENNE whose telephone number is (571) 272-7947. The examiner can normally be reached between M-F, 7am-3:30pm Flex. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Samuel J. Morano can be reached on (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 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 20. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Daniel V Venne/ Senior Examiner, Art Unit 3615 01/27/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 14, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 12, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 27, 2026
Final Rejection — §112
Apr 14, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 14, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600446
DEVICES AND SYSTEMS FOR MOUNTING A TRANSDUCER WITHIN A WATERCRAFT HULL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595030
HULL-MOUNTED INSTALLATION CONVERSION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595034
Variable Angle Rudder Lift Actuation Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589834
DEVICE FOR CONNECTING TWO PARTS OF A HULL OF A SHIP, AND HULL OF A SHIP COMPRISING SUCH A DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583561
SAILING BOAT WITH AN AUXILIARY HYDRODYNAMIC SURFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
71%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+14.9%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1635 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