Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/282,605

VESSEL OSCILLATION DAMPER SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Sep 18, 2023
Examiner
VENNE, DANIEL V
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
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 . A preliminary amendment was filed by applicant on 09/18/2023. Claims 1-26 are amended. Claims 1-26 are remaining in the application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 5. 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. 6. Claims 1-26 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, regards as the invention. 7. The claimed feature limitations: the transom, the vertical axis, the center, the sides, the upper fin, the immediately lower fin, the water level, their articulated connection, the vessel’s engine, the vessel data feed, the direction, the inclination, the boat, the emergency stop button, the flap assemblies, the bow, the speed, the parallel, their zero-level surface, the level, the bottom, the automatic setting, the optimal inclination, the maximum speed, the minimal impact, its inclination, the forces, the same time, the same side, the response time, the inclination alternation, the option, the turning, the turning radius, the steering, the automatic option, the position sensor system, their zero plane, the individual fins, the size, the number, the desired resistance, the fin assembly, the movement, the fin assembly retract button, which plate, the hull, the rotation, the operation, the oil pump, its operation, the time interval, the operator, the small inclination, the change, the distance, the hydraulic piston cylinders, their moving part, their range, the information transmission system, its parts, and the existing wiring lack sufficient antecedent basis in the claims (where recited in independent claim 1 and subsequent dependent claims without proper antecedent). 8. Use of pronouns such as it, its, these, them and their (used throughout the claims) does not make clear the specific features being referred to. 9. Regarding claim 1, the phrase -type for the claimed limitation P-type renders the claim indefinite because the claim includes elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by -type), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). 10. The terms intense and small in claims 8-10 and 18 are relative terms which renders the claims indefinite. The terms are not defined by the claims, the Specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the claimed feature limitations: intense lateral forces, intense forces, small rotation and small inclination are rendered indefinite. Claims 1-26 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b). The claims are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited. Allowable Subject Matter As best understood by the examiner, claim 1 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. As best understood by the examiner, claims 2-26 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 14. The prior art cited and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The prior art references disclose various vessel oscillation and/or pitch control/damper systems. 15. 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). 16. 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 12/04/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 18, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+14.9%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1635 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