Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/337,851

WING SAIL

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Jun 20, 2023
Examiner
RODZIWICZ, AARON M
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Ozone Kitesurf Limited
OA Round
2 (Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
395 granted / 560 resolved
+18.5% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
580
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
41.4%
+1.4% vs TC avg
§102
28.2%
-11.8% vs TC avg
§112
25.2%
-14.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 560 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Response to Amendment This action is in response to Amendments made on 12/19/2025, in which: claims 1-15 are amended and claim 16 is new. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-10, 12-14, 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Each of the claims have been amended to state “a wing foiling, wing surfing or winging” which has not been previously disclosed in the claims or applicants disclosure at the time of filing and is considered New Matter. As such, applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action. 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 1-3, 5-8, 12, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winner (ES 2984553) in view of Prouty (US 4846424). Regarding claims 1-3, 5, 8, 12, 16, Winner discloses a wing sail, comprising a first inflatable strut extending in a width direction (6), a second inflatable strut extending in a length direction (16) from the first inflatable strut (6), at least one handle (two handles formed by grip notch 20 and 22 and grab bar 26) mounted on the second inflatable strut (16), and first sail sheet (14) wherein the first inflatable strut (6) defines a leading edge (7) of the wing sail (1), wherein the first sail sheet (14) comprise a front edge (forward edge at leading edge of sail) and a rear edge (rear edge at trailing edge of sail) that are opposite to one another, wherein the front edge (forward edge at leading edge of sail) connect (Fig. 1) to the first inflatable strut (6), and wherein the first sail sheet (14) extends rearwardly away from the first inflatable strut (6) towards a trailing edge (12) of the wing sail (1), wherein the rear edge (rear edge at trailing edge of sail) of the first sail sheet (14) is located at the trailing edge (12) of the wing sail (1), wherein the first sail sheet (14) extends over or from an uppermost surface (Fig. 1) of the first inflatable strut (6), but does not expressly disclose a second sail sheet, the second sail sheet being spaced apart from the first sail sheet, wherein the second sail sheet is interrupted at the second inflatable strut to provide a user with access to the at least one handle, wherein the rear edge of the second sail sheet is located between 15% and 100% of the way in the length direction from the front edge of the second sail sheet to the trailing edge of the wing sail, over greater than half of the full width of the wing sail, having rib panels that each extend in the height and length directions and set a spacing between the first and second sail sheets, and wherein the first or second sail sheets comprise air intake ports configured to inlet air to in between the first and second sail sheets. However, Prouty discloses a similar wing sail structure (10) having a second sail sheet (14), the second sail sheet (14) being spaced apart from the first sail sheet (12), wherein the second sail sheet (14) is interrupted at the second inflatable strut (34) to provide a user with access to the at least one handle (52, 54), wherein the rear edge (18) of the second sail sheet (14) is located between 15% and 100% of the way (sheet 14 extends the entire length, Fig. 1) in the length direction (front to back) from the front edge (16) of the second sail sheet (14) to the trailing edge (18) of the wing sail (10), over a majority of the full width (sheet 14 extends the full width of the device, Fig. 1) of the wing sail (10), having rib panels (26) that each extend in the height and length directions (Fig. 1) and set a spacing between (Column 4, lines 45-46, are equally spaced) the first and second sail sheets (12, 14), and wherein the first or second sail sheets (12, 14) comprise air intake ports (36) configured to inlet air to in between the first and second sail sheets (12, 14). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention/application, to modify Winner, by adding a second sail sheet, the second sail sheet being spaced apart from the first sail sheet, wherein the second sail sheet is interrupted at the second inflatable strut to provide a user with access to the at least one handle, wherein the rear edge of the second sail sheet is located between 15% and 100% of the way in the length direction from the front edge of the second sail sheet to the trailing edge of the wing sail, over a majority of the full width of the wing sail, having rib panels that each extend in the height and length directions and set a spacing between the first and second sail sheets, and wherein the first or second sail sheets comprise air intake ports configured to inlet air to in between the first and second sail sheets, as taught by Prouty, for the purpose of providing favorable lift characteristics with a high degree of maneuverability in all wind conditions. Regarding claim 6, Winner discloses wherein the extension of the first inflatable strut (6) curves towards the length direction (Fig. 3) as the first inflatable strut (6) extends away from the second inflatable strut (16). Regarding claim 7, Winner discloses wherein the second inflatable strut (16) extends from the first inflatable strut (6) at a point that is mid-way (element 16 is a central strut, Fig. 3) along the first inflatable strut (6). Regarding claim 13, Winner discloses wherein the first sail sheet (14) extends continuously over the second inflatable strut (16) whilst extending between opposing ends (forward to rear end and/or left side to right side, Fig. 3) of the first inflatable strut (6). Claims 4, 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winner (ES 2984553) and Prouty (US 4846424) in view of Gagnaire (FR 3078949). Regarding claims 4, 9-10, Winner discloses the invention substantially as set forth above, but does not expressly disclose wherein the rear edges are both joined together along the trailing edge of the wing sail, wherein the rib panels comprise apertures extending through them in the width direction, and wherein each rib panel comprises a taper along the length direction of the rib, the taper reducing the height of the rib panel as the rib panel extends away from the leading edge of the wing sail. However, Gagnaire discloses a flexible wing sail structure (100, 200) having the rear edges both joined together along the trailing edge (Page 1, lines 15-24, secured at their ends at 13F, Figs. 7-10) of the wing sail (100, 200), wherein the rib panels (14, 214) comprise apertures (16, 216) extending through them in the width direction (Figs. 1-2), and wherein each rib panel (14, 214) comprises a taper along the length direction of the rib (tapers from front to back, Figs. 1-2), the taper (tapers from front to back, Figs. 1-2) reducing the height of the rib panel (14, 214) as the rib panel (14, 214) extends away from the leading edge (13, 213) of the wing sail (100, 200). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention/application, to modify Winner/Prouty, by making the rear edges both joined together along the trailing edge of the wing sail, wherein the rib panels comprise apertures extending through them in the width direction, and wherein each rib panel comprises a taper along the length direction of the rib, the taper reducing the height of the rib panel as the rib panel extends away from the leading edge of the wing sail, as taught by Gagnaire, for the purpose of providing each internal section between the ribs to inflate the entire interior structure of the wing sail for increased capabilities. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 11, 15 are allowable. Claims 14 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/19/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicants argument that Winner (ES 2984553) and Prouty (US 4846424) fail to teach “a wing foiling, surfing or winging wing sail with an inflatable strut extending in a length direction, an inflatable strut extending in a width direction, and first and second sail sheets each with a front edge and a rear edge wherein the front edges both connect to the first inflatable strut, and wherein the first and second sail sheets both extend rearwardly away from the first inflatable strut”, examiner respectfully disagrees. Firstly, the addition of amended subject matter “wing foiling, surfing or winging” is new matter and must be canceled from the claims. Prior art Winner discloses a flying inflatable wing structure with an inflatable strut in a width direction (6) and an inflatable strut in a length direction (16) with a first sail sheet (14) that comprises a front edge (forward edge of sheet 14) and a rear edge (rear edge of sheet 14), wherein the front edge (forward edge of sheet 14) connects to the first inflatable strut (6), and wherein the first sail sheet (14) extends rearwardly away from the first inflatable strut (6), while Prouty discloses a wing sail structure having a first inflatable strut extending in a width direction (38) and a second inflatable strut extending in a length direction (34), with a first sail sheet (12) and a second sail sheet (14) each with a front edge (forward edge of sheets 12, 14) and a rear edge (rear edge of sheets 12, 14) wherein the front edges (forward edge of sheets 12, 14) both sheets (12, 14) connect to the first inflatable strut (first sheet 12 connects directly to first strut 38 on the upper surface, second sheet 14 connects via rib elements 26 and side elements 22 and 24), and wherein the first and second sail sheets (12, 14) both extend rearwardly away (Fig. 1) from the first inflatable strut (38). As such, the combination of Winner and Prouty disclose the limitations as claimed. Conclusion 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON M RODZIWICZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6611. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10 am - 6 pm. 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, Joshua Michener can be reached at (571) 272-1467. 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. /AARON M RODZIWICZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 20, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 19, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595044
AIRFLOW INTERRUPTING DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593829
ARTHROPOD BLOOD WARMING APPARATUS, SYSTEM & METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12568941
DEVICE FOR SORTING INSECTS, ALLOWING THE SEPARATION OF CRAWLING INSECTS FROM THE REST OF A MIXTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568942
INSECT FARMING WITH PRE-DOSED UNITS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564175
DRIVING ROBOT FOR AGRICULTURAL TASKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
70%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+17.5%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 560 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