Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/369,261

CATAMARAN BOAT HULLS AND METHODS OF MAKING AND USING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 18, 2023
Examiner
WIEST, ANTHONY D
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Fish Sean Ventures LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
635 granted / 896 resolved
+18.9% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+34.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
925
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
44.4%
+4.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
§112
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 896 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 . Claims 31-48 are pending in the current application. 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 31-37, 39, 40 and 42-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matthews et al., US 10246162 (herein after Matthews 162). Matthews 162 discloses a marine vessel hull comprising an aft transom section (see Fig. 2) , a keel oriented along a hull centerline, the keel extending from an intersection point with the aft transom section to an upward curving bow (see Fig. 2), a hull running surface disposed on each side of the keel extending from a running surface intersection with the aft transom section to the upward curving bow, two longitudinal steps #120, #220 (see Fig. 3 ) disposed at respectively different points along the keel and the hull running surface, each of the two longitudinal steps running across a width Ws of the hull, and two transverse steps (See Fig. 9) disposed lengthwise on opposing sides of the keel, wherein the two longitudinal steps divide the sponson running surface into an aft sponson running surface section, a mid-hull sponson running surface section, and a forward hull sponson running surface section, wherein the mid-hull sponson running surface section being lower than the aft sponson running surface section at a first keel intersection between the aft sponson running surface section and the mid-hull sponson running surface section due to a first longitudinal step of the two longitudinal steps, and wherein the forward sponson running surface section being lower than the mid-hull sponson running surface section at a second keel intersection between the forward sponson running surface section and the mid-hull sponson running surface section due to a second longitudinal step of the two longitudinal steps (see Fig. 2). Matthews 162 does not explicitly disclose a catamaran boat hull comprising a pair of hull sponsons comprising a first sponson and a second sponson, wherein the first sponson and the second sponson are disposed in parallel relative to a catamaran boat hull centerline; an underside tunnel surface that couples the first sponson to the second sponson, the underside tunnel surface forming a channel region along the catamaran boat hull centerline and between the first sponson and the second sponson through which water runs when the catamaran boat hull moves through the water or wherein the first transverse step of the two transverse steps being disposed between the keel and an inner chine of the first sponson or the second sponson, and wherein a second transverse step of the two transverse steps being disposed between the keel and an outer chine of the first sponson or the second sponson. Matthew 162 does disclose the hull form could be used on a multihull vessel (See Column 6, lines 37-53). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Matthews 162 by using identical parallel hulls in a catamaran design incorporating an underside tunnel through which water runs when the catamaran boat hull moves through the water. Doing so would be a typical design of a catamaran vessel incorporating the hull form disclosed by Matthews 162. Regarding claims 32: Matthews 162 discloses the first longitudinal step introduces air to the aft sponson running surface section and the second longitudinal step introduces air to the mid-hull sponson running surface section and where the transverse step each provide a lengthwise guide for at least a portion of the air introduced to each of the sponson running surface sections (See Figure 8 showing air dispersion on the underside of the hull). Regarding claims 33-36 and 42-45: Matthews 162 discloses the longitudinal step profile has a curved outer edge portion being further away from the aft transom section and wherein the step edge profile includes an inward step edge offset where each of the steps meet a side of the respective hull. (See Fig. 1-4, and Fig. 8) where each of the curved longitudinal step portion and inward step edge offset provide enhanced airflow into a channel extending along the length of the longitudinal steps (See Column 4, lines 11-29). Regarding claim 37 and 46: While Matthews 162 is not explicit in the longitudinal step profile varying along a height of each longitudinal step or length of each longitudinal step. Such variation is clearly shown in Figures 1 and 5 where the longitudinal step height varies. Claims 38 and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matthews 162 in view Melvin et al., US 10518843 (disclosed by applicant). Matthews 162 discloses the invention set forth above, but does not explicitly disclose a an underside wave splitter disposed on the underside tunnel surface along the catamaran boat hull centerline, the underside wave splitter comprising at least a set of downward protruding side surfaces and a protruding aft surface, and a set of spray rails disposed along the underside tunnel surface and aft of the wave splitter wherein the spray rails extend from the protruding aft surface of the underside wave splitter and away from the catamaran boat hull centerline. Melvin discloses a wave splitter 116 and spray rails 222a, 222b as claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Matthews 162 by adding a wave splitter and spray rails in a catamaran design to soften the impact of waves against the upper wall of the tunnel and to provide a smoother ride. Claims 47 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matthews 162 in view of Matthews et al., US 10858069 (herein after Matthews 069). Matthews 162 discloses the invention set forth above, but does not explicitly disclose a transition surface between an angled sponson running surface and the outermost sponson running surface edge is represented by a smooth, arc-shaped curve. Figure 10 of Matthews 069 shows a smooth arc-shaped curve forming a transition surface between the angled sponson running surface and the outermost sponson running surface edge. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matthews 162 with smooth transition surfaces between the angled sponson running surface and the outermost sponson running surface edge as shown in Matthews 069. Doing so uses common hull curvatures to create smooth lines and transitions between adjacent sections of the hull. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D WIEST whose telephone number is (571)270-5974. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00 - 3:00. 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, Samuel Morano can be reached at 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 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. /ANTHONY D WIEST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 18, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595025
STEP APPARATUSES FOR BOATS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589836
SURGE DAMPING SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES FOR USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12577942
METHODS OF SECURING A VESSEL DURING TRANSPORTATION, OFF-LOADING, AND INSTALLATION OF WIND TURBINE COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571372
FLOATING WIND TURBINE SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565296
RAPID REPLACEMENT CONTROL FIN FOR AN UNDERWATER VEHICLE
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+34.7%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 896 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