Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/337,466

Portable Beach Wall Device

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jun 20, 2023
Examiner
TOLEDO-DURAN, EDWIN J
Art Unit
3678
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
530 granted / 766 resolved
+17.2% vs TC avg
Strong +48% interview lift
Without
With
+48.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
818
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.8%
+5.8% vs TC avg
§102
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§112
22.4%
-17.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 766 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION In response to remarks filed on 3 July 2025 Status of Claims Claims 1, 5-8, 9 and 17-20 are pending; Claims 1, 5 and 9 are currently amended; Claims 6-8 and 17-20 were previously presented; Claims 2-4 and 10-16 are cancelled; Claims 1, 5-8, 9 and 17-20 are rejected herein. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed on 3 July 2025 have been fully considered and they are moot since new references are being used to reject the claims in view of the new limitations. The claims are too broad and examiner believes yet-to-be-found references in a wide array of unrelated areas could read on the claims. 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. Claim 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gradek (U.S. Patent No. 5,688,075). As to Claim 1, Gradek discloses a portable beach wall device comprising: A body (38 in Figure 17) comprised of a pointed end (39. Element 39 is shaped like a point); A first fastener (Left 70) positioned on a left edge of the body (38); A second fastener (Right 70) positioned on a right edge of the body (38); and A closed cell foam (35 is filled with polystyrene which is a closed-cell foam; Column 12, Lines 35-37: “The air bladder may include a polystyrene foam component to again add to the buoyancy of the system”) padding positioned on a top edge of the body (38); and Wherein the first and second fasteners (70) are magnetic fasteners (Column 17, Lines 26-27: “wherein the releasable connection means comprises bar magnets 70 disposed in sleeve elements 71”). Claims 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Powers (U.S. Patent No. 4,142,477) As to Claim 5, Powers discloses a portable beach wall device comprising: A hollow body (10) comprised of a pointed end (16) and a cap (30) configured to allow access to an interior of the hollow body; A cup holder (44) attached to the body; A first fastener (38) positioned on a left edge of the body; A second fastener (32) positioned on a right edge of the body; and An impact resistant latex foam (20) padding positioned on a top edge of the body (Latex foam is a foam rubber). As to Claim 6, Powers discloses the invention of Claim 5 (Refer to Claim 5 discussion). Powers also discloses wherein the hollow body (10) is comprised of a corrugated material (Portion 24 contains valleys and ridges which can be interpreted as a corrugated area). As to Claim 7, Powers discloses the invention of Claim 5 (Refer to Claim 5 discussion). Powers also discloses wherein the hollow body (10) is comprised of a convex body shape (Figures 2 and 3). As to Claim 8, Powers discloses the invention of Claim 5 (Refer to Claim 5 discussion). Powers also discloses wherein the pointed end (16) is comprised of a rounded point (42). 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. Claims 9 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pasij (U.S. Patent No. 6,588,979) in view of Poscich (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0199123). As to Claim 9, Pasij discloses a portable beach wall device comprising: A hollow body (18 contains a plurality of holes and “hollow” is defined as “having a hole or empty space inside”) comprised of a pointed end (24) and a cap (64) configured to allow access to an interior (Interior of 70) of the hollow body; A first hook fastener (40) positioned on a left edge of the body (“Hook” is defined as attach or fix. Element 40 can be interpreted as a hook fastener under the broadest reasonable interpretation since it attaches or fixes one element with another); A second loop fastener (44) positioned on a right edge of the body (A circle is a “loop”. Therefore, circle 44 under the broadest reasonable interpretation can be interpreted as a loop fastener); An impact resistant padding (50) positioned on a top edge of the body; A handle (62) extending out of the impact resistant padding (50) comprising a raised textured grip area (Figure 1 shows 62 with a bolt head on top which can be interpreted as a raised textured grip area). However, Pasij does not explicitly discloses that the padding is made of rebond foam. But Pasij discloses in Column 1, Lines 34-36 that “the flood fence may be made of any suitable material, such as sheet aluminum, a plastic material, galvanized sheet metal, wood; etc”. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to make the padding of rebond foam since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. Furthermore, Pasij as modified (See above paragraph) is silent about a solar panel. Poscich discloses a barrier (10, 12, 13) with a solar panel attached thereto (Paragraph 0079: “For example, alternative energy sources may be used, such as a wind turbine system to harness the vortex air effect, a solar panel system attached to the outer shell”). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a solar panel. The motivation would have been to increase the utility of the system by allowing it to be used to produce some energy for nearby activities. As to Claim 17, Pasij as modified teaches the invention of Claim 9 (Refer to Claim 9 discussion). Pasij as modified also teaches further comprised of an umbrella holder (72 can receive an umbrella). As to Claim 18, Pasij as modified teaches the invention of Claim 9 (Refer to Claim 9 discussion). Pasij as modified also teaches further comprised of a hook (40). As to Claim 19, Pasij as modified teaches the invention of Claim 9 (Refer to Claim 9 discussion). Pasij as modified also teaches further comprised of a battery charged by the solar panel (It is inherent that since a solar panel is used to produce energy, the presence of a battery is essential to accumulate the produced energy). As to Claim 20, Pasij as modified teaches the invention of Claim 9 (Refer to Claim 9 discussion). Pasij as modified also teaches wherein the battery is comprised of a charging port (It is inherent that since a solar panel is used to produce energy, the presence of a battery is essential to accumulate the produced energy and the presence of a charging port is essential to transmit the energy from the panel to the battery). Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 10:00AM to 6:00PM EST. 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, AMBER ANDERSON can be reached at (571) 270-5281. 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. /EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 20, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jul 03, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595634
FORMWORK DEVICE EQUIPPED WITH A DEVIATION-MEASURING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577748
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR OPTIMIZING REGULATION OF RESERVOIR SEDIMENT DISCHARGING BASED ON ASYNCHRONOUS PROPAGATION CHARACTERISTIC BETWEEN FLOOD PEAK AND SEDIMENT PEAK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571286
UMBILICAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559901
IMPLEMENT AND A METHOD FOR OBTAINING INFORMATION RELATED TO SAID IMPLEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12545827
COMBINED TREATMENT PROCESS FOR REMOVING AND INHIBITING SCALE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
69%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+48.1%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 766 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