Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/233,883

Bathroom Drying System

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 15, 2023
Examiner
TREMARCHE, CONNOR J.
Art Unit
3762
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
La Fan LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allow Rate
407 granted / 623 resolved
-4.7% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
61 currently pending
Career history
684
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
61.4%
+21.4% vs TC avg
§102
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
§112
21.4%
-18.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 623 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 306841 (Ortiz hereinafter) in view of US 2014/0360805 (Berkman hereinafter). Regarding claim 1, Ortiz teaches a bathroom air handling system that discloses a ceiling fan (Figures 1 and 5), comprising: an outer cover to removably connect to at least a portion of a ceiling (Outer cover 90 and 101 in Figure 5), a plurality of fan blades movably disposed within at least a portion of the outer cover to blow air and dry at least one of a shower and a bathtub (Fan blades 111 to move air as shown in Figure 5 and Column 4 Lines 45-50), and a light connected to at least a portion of the outer cover to illuminate and emit at least one beam of light therefrom (Light 119 in Figure 5); a control means for controlling the light (Column 1 lines 23-25). Ortiz is silent with respect to a fan control device connected to the ceiling fan to control at least one operation of the plurality of fan blades. However, Berkman teaches a ceiling air handler that discloses a fan control device connected to the ceiling fan to control at least one operation of the plurality of fan blades (Figure 13 with ¶ 81-84, specifically ¶ 83); and a light control device connected to the light to control at least one operation of the light (¶ 82 with switch 1334 in Figure 13). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify eh ceiling fan of Ortiz with the remote control of Berkman to allow for a user to control the fan system from anywhere. Regarding claim 2, Ortiz’s modified teachings are described above in claim 1 where the combination of Ortiz and Berkman would further disclose that the outer cover comprises: a main body (Main body 90); a plurality of vent apertures circumferentially disposed on at least a portion of the main body on a cylindrical surface of the main body to facilitate movement of air therethrough (Apertures 93 in Figure 5) ; and a central aperture disposed at a center of the main body (Central aperture 96 on 101). Regarding claim 3, Ortiz’s modified teachings are described above in claim 2 where the combination of Ortiz and Berkman would further disclose that the plurality of fan blades are disposed within the central aperture (Evident from Figure 5 with 111 being within the central aperture to feed the airflow out of 96). Regarding claim 4, Ortiz’s modified teachings are described above in claim 2 where the combination of Ortiz and Berkman would further disclose a heating control unit disposed within at least a portion of the outer cover to generate heat and increase a temperature level of the air blown from the plurality of fan blades (¶ 54 of Berkman; Ortiz does disclose a broad control means in Column 1 Lines 23-25). Regarding claim 5, Ortiz’s modified teachings are described above in claim 2 where the combination of Ortiz and Berkman would further disclose that the fan control device and the light control device are integrated as a software application on a computing device (¶ 87-88 and 96-98 of Berkman). Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 306841 (Ortiz) in view of US 2014/0360805 (Berkman) and further in view of US 2022/0154954 (Sinur hereinafter). Regarding claim 6, Ortiz’s modified teachings are described above in claim 1 but are silent with respect to a computing device running a program thereon to automatically create a drying cycle on a bathroom based on a size of a room, a temperature level of the room, and a humidity level of the room. Berkman does disclose a computer program used to monitor the fan system with sensors for temperature and humidity (¶ 87-88, 96-98, and Figure 15 of Berkman). However, Sinur teaches a smart house control system that discloses prompting a user to create system settings such as room dimensions (¶ 65) and monitoring environmental values such as temperature and humidity (¶ 43). The resultant combination would be such that there is a computing device running a program thereon to automatically create a drying cycle on a bathroom based on a size of a room, a temperature level of the room, and a humidity level of the room. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify eh control of the fan/controller of Ortiz/Berkman with the control of Sinur to allow for a more manicured control scheme to be applied for each sized room the fan is used in. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CONNOR J. TREMARCHE whose telephone number is (571)272-2175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0700-1700 Eastern. 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, MICHAEL HOANG can be reached at (571) 272-6460. 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. /CONNOR J TREMARCHE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 15, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601500
COOKING APPLIANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601337
PIEZO-ELECTRIC FLUID PUMP
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598938
DEVICE FOR DRYING SEMICONDUCTOR SUBSTRATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590404
DRYER AND OPERATING METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590402
DRYER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+27.4%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 623 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