Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/356,471

Elevation Adders for a Viewing Optic with an Integrated Display System

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Jul 21, 2023
Examiner
ELDRED, JOHN W
Art Unit
3641
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Sheltered Wings Inc. D/B/A Vortex Optics
OA Round
2 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
767 granted / 992 resolved
+25.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
1014
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
44.1%
+4.1% vs TC avg
§102
14.8%
-25.2% vs TC avg
§112
15.7%
-24.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 992 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In claim 1, “configured to clip” is vague and indefinite. The required structural limitations are not clear. Is there some sort of clip element required for the connection? Is the elevation adder itself somehow constructed such that it inherently clips to the front of the viewing optic? In claims 1, 7, and 10, “to add angle or elevation to a target image” is vague, indefinite, and alternative. First, it is not clear when or how a choice is made between adding angle or elevation. Second, angles are relative parameters and it is not clear what angle is being added. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Hamilton et al (2020/0049455). Hamilton et al disclose a viewing optic with all claimed elements including: A viewing optic having an optical system with an objective lens system that focuses a target image from an outward scene to a first focal plane (para[0015]), where in the first focal plane is located between the objective lens system and an erector system that inverts the target image (Fig.1E;para[0015],[0184],[0193]), and an active display configured to generate an image, where in the image is projected to the first focal plane of the optical system (para[0275]-[0276],[0297],[0312] projecting a digital image on to the first focal plane; para[0559]); and an elevation adder (laser rangefinder/LRF) configured to communicate with the active display (para[0395]-[0397],[0404]-[0406],[0552]- [0553],[0558] ballistic calculator determined that the correction required 10 milliradians of elevation adjustment to hit the target, the digital display would place an aimpoint 10 milliradians below the center of the crosshair, [0632]). As per claim 2, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim1, wherein the image is a digital reticle (para[0312],[0558]-[0559],[0639] active reticle; para[0649}-[0650)). As per claim 3, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim 1, wherein the image is a corrected aiming point (para[0395],[0558]- [0559],[0639]). As per claim 4, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim 1, wherein the image is a ballistic solution (para[0650}). As per claim 5, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim 1, wherein the elevation adder is configured to communicate with the active display through a wireless connection (para[0404]-[0406},[0553)). As per claim 6, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim 1, wherein the elevation adder is configured to communicate with the active display through a wired connection (para[0404}-[0406],[0553]). As per claim 7, Hamilton et al disclose a system comprising (Abstract): (a)an elevation adder (laser rangefinder/LRF) (para[0395]-[0397],[0404]-[0406],[0552]- [0553],[0558]); and (b) a viewing optic having an active display (para[0015],[0275]-[0276],[0297],[0312],[0559)), the viewing optic configured to communicate with the elevation adder (para[0404]-[0406],[0553]), wherein the viewing optic detects additional elevation provided by the elevation adder and communicates the additional elevation to the active display (para[0395]-[0397],[0404]-[0406],[0552]-[0553],[0558],[0632]), wherein the active display generates a correct bullet drop in a first focal of the viewing optic (para(para[0395]-[0397],[(0404]-[0406],[(0552]-[0553],[0558],[0632]). As per claim 8, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim 7, wherein the viewing optic is configured to communicate with the elevation adder through a wireless connection (para[0404}-[0406],[0553)). As per claim 9, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim 7, wherein the viewing optic is configured to communicate with the elevation adder through a wired connection (para[0404]-[0406],[0553}). As per claim 10, Hamilton et al disclose a system comprising (Abstract): (a)an elevation adder (Jaser rangefinder/LRF) (para[0395]-[0397],[0404]-[0406},[0552]-[0553],[0558]); and (b) a viewing optic comprising a main tube, an objective system coupled to a first end of the main tube and an ocular system coupled to a second end of the main tube (Fig.1C-1D; para[0014],[0179]), an erector lens system disposed between the objective system and the ocular system (para[0014]-[0015)),a first focal plane located between the objective system and the erector lens system and an active display (Fig.1E; para[0015],[0181],[0193],[0275]-[0276],[0297],[0312],[0559]), the viewing optic is configured to determine additional elevation provided by the elevation adder and communicate the additional elevation to the active display (para[0395}-[0397],[0404]-[0406],[0552]-[0553],[0558],[0632]), wherein the active display generates an image selected from the group consisting of: digital reticle, corrected aiming point, or a ballistic solution (para[0312],[0395],[(0558]-[0559],[0639],[0649]-[0650]), wherein the image is projected into the first focal of the viewing optic (para[0275]-[0276],[0297],[0312],[0559)). As per claim 11, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim 10, wherein the image is a digital reticle (para[0312],[0558]-[0559],[0639]activereticle;para[0649]-[0650)). As per claim 12, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim 10, wherein the image is a corrected aiming point (para[0395],[0558]-[0559],[0639)). As per claim 13, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim 10, wherein the image is a ballistic solution (para[0650)). As per claim 14, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim 10, wherein the viewing optic is configured to communicate with the elevation adder through a wireless connection (para[0404]-[0406],[0553)). As per claim 15, Hamilton et al disclose the system of Claim10, wherein the viewing optic is configured to communicate with the elevation adder through a wired connection (para[0404]-[0406],[0553)). Applicant's arguments filed 9-22-2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant failed to make any substantive argument as to why the claims are not anticipated by the cited prior art. Applicant made some minor amendments but they do not seem to add subject matter which was not present in the cited art in the previous rejection, especially in view of the 112 rejections above. 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 J. WOODROW ELDRED whose telephone number is (571)272-6901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30. 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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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. /J. Woodrow Eldred/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641 JWE
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 21, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Sep 22, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 23, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601554
FIREARM LOADER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595988
Stitched Body Armor Panels with Offset Construction
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12571602
Trigger Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571605
Firearm Shooting Rest
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12566050
PROTECTIVE VEHICLE SURROUND SHIELD
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
77%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+7.8%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 992 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