Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/373,755

DIVING BOARD AND METHOD OF MAKING

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Sep 27, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, NYCA T
Art Unit
3784
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Global Pool Products
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
454 granted / 676 resolved
-2.8% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
704
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§103
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
§102
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
§112
30.1%
-9.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 676 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Status of Claims This is a Second Non-Final to amendments filed by Applicant on 08/11/2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claim 6 is 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. Claim 6 recites the limitation "the rod supports are" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears Applicant intends for Claim 6 to be dependent from Claim 4 which discloses a rod support. In order to proceed, the Office will interpret the claim such as –the rod is carried by a rod support which-- and/or Claim 6 should be indicated as dependent from Claim 4. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 2-4, 6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Buck, Jr (US 3861674). Regarding Claim 2, Buck teaches a diving board comprising; a hollow shell 61 formed in the general shape of a diving board (Refer to Fig. 5 Col 4-5 Lines 65-8:” second envelope is provided by a layer 61 of fiberglass and resin. This layer lies adjacent and is adhered to (FIGS. 5 and 8) layers 59 and 58. This layer 61 may be traced starting at the left side of the board (as appears in FIG. 8) under layer 59 to the level of rib portion 42, thence under layer 58 and continuing to the level of rib portion 42 on the other side of the board, thence under layer 59 on that side of the board, and thence over layer 54 to the point of beginning. The weight of the fiberglass in layer 61 may be the same as that of layer 54.”); an elongated rod 26,40 carried by and disposed within the shell between an upper inner surface and a lower inner surface of the shell in a generally longitudinal orientation (Refer to Fig. 5); and a mass of flexible material 56,57 disposed within the shell, the rod being at least partially embedded in the mass of flexible material (Refer to Fig. 5 Col 4 Lines 56-64:” A foam layer 57, similar to foam layer 56, is disposed in each angle section 38 and adhered to fiberglass and resin layer 58. Again, foam is poured to an excess and then cut to provide a cut on a plane extending substantially from a point at the bottom of rib portion 42 to a point at the outer end of web portion 40. Then a layer of fiberglass and resin 59 is disposed over and adhered to each of the said cut surfaces of foam. The fiberglass of layer 59 may be 10-20 oz.”). Regarding Claim 3, Buck continues to teach in which the flexible material comprises urethane (Refer to the Abstract:” The enveloping tubular structure comprises substantially low density polyurethane foam disposed between the metallic ribs and adjacent the outside of the ribs on both sides and at all areas other than the fulcrum area and the fixed end portion of the board.”). Regarding Claim 4, Buck continues to teach in which at least a portion of the rod 26,40 is carried by a rod support 48 extending inward from an inner surface of the shell 61, the rod support 48 being configured to resist displacement of the rod by an inflow of the flexible material 56,57,60 into the shell interior (Refer to Fig. 5 Col 3 Lines 40-55:” A horizontal sheet 48 (see for example FIGS. 5 and 10) extends substantially the full length and width of the board and is adhered by adhesive layer 50 to the upper surfaces of the metallic webs 26, 32, and 40 of channel and angle sections 22, 24, 38 and this whether the channel and angle sections are a single extrusion or formed of a plurality of pieces. The sheet 48 is preferably a metal sheet of an aluminum alloy but the same may comprise a sheet of fiberglass and resin. Where a plurality of pieces are involved to form the web and ribs, the sheet 48 aids in binding the pieces together as a unit. Also the sheet 48 is preferably of more corrosive resistant alloy than sections 22, 24, and 38 and thus would be useful even though the web and downwardly projecting ribs are formed of a single piece.”). Regarding Claim 6, Buck continues to teach in which the rod supports 48 are integrally formed with the shell as a single unitary piece (Refer to Fig. 5 Col 3 Lines 40-55:”….. the sheet 48 aids in binding the pieces together as a unit. Also the sheet 48 is preferably of more corrosive resistant alloy than sections 22, 24, and 38 and thus would be useful even though the web and downwardly projecting ribs are formed of a single piece.”). Regarding Claim 8, Buck continues to teach which the rod comprises fiberglass 54 (Refer to Fig. 10 Col 3-4 Lines 67-3:” After such a core is constructed, all of the metallic, external surfaces thereof are treated with a metal etching primer layer 52 and then a layer of fiberglass and resin 54 (for this detail see FIGS. 5, 8, 10 and 11) is provided over such external surfaces.”). Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ogden (US 3862755). Regarding Claim 21, Ogden teaches a method of making diving boards, the method comprising the steps of: forming a plurality of hollow shells 28,30, each in the general shape of a diving board (Refer to Fig. 2); providing a plurality of elongated rods 52; inserting at least two different numbers of rods into at least two respective shells of the plurality of hollow shells, the two different numbers of rods having been predetermined to impart two different diving board elasticity values to respective finished diving boards made from the hollow shells (Refer to Col 2 Lines 10-13:” The tubes in each bore on either side of the tube located at the fulcrum have a smaller wall thickness so that the board is more flexible at points located away from the board fulcrum. By varying the wall thickness of the tubes in each bore of the diving board, the spring characteristics of the board can be easily and economically varied and controlled.”…Col 3 Lines 21-25:” it will be recognized by those of skill in the art that the number and width of elongated members may be varied if a diving board of different width is desired or if elongated members of different widths are desired.”). The Office takes the position that Ogden teaches multiple boards with varying widths may be made by varying the number of rods in addition to varying the thickness of the rods to allow different boards of varying elasticity. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buck, Jr (US 3861674) in view of Isaacson et al (US 20140057757 A1). Regarding Claim 9, Buck teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to teach in which the shell comprises a thermoplastic material. Isaac teaches a diving board comprising thermoplastics (Refer to Paragraph [0061]:” Core material possibilities include one or more of the following: open or closed cell foams such as polyurethane foam, polyvinyl chloride foam, polyethylene foam, or polystyrene foam; wood; or honeycomb mat structures made of aluminum, paper, or a thermoplastic such as polypropylene.”). Isaacson et al teaches that such thermoplastics are known materials in the art for diving boards and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the shell of Buck to comprise thermoplastics since Isaacson et al teaches that such material are known and suitable in the art and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 10 and 11 are 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. Claims 12-20 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Buck, Jr and Ogden are the closest prior arts to the claimed invention and method with Buck teaching a diving board comprising; a hollow shell formed in the general shape of a diving board; an elongated rod carried by and disposed within the shell between an upper inner surface and a lower inner surface of the shell in a generally longitudinal orientation; and a mass of flexible material disposed within the shell, the rod being at least partially embedded in the mass of flexible material, in which at least a portion of the rod is carried by a rod support extending inward from an inner surface of the shell, the rod support being configured to resist displacement of the rod by an inflow of the flexible material into the shell interior in combination with in which the rod is supported by multiple rod supports extending from the lower inner surface of the shell. But fails to teach the claimed invention as a whole further in which the rod is supported by multiple rod supports extending from the lower inner surface of the shell, the rod comprises an elongated cylindrical shape; and upper surface of the rod support comprises a concave shape oriented to receive and positively position a portion of the rod relative to the shell; which the shell has a shell opening through which the rod is insertable into engagement with the rod support; and/or the method of method of making diving boards, the method comprising, for each diving board, the steps of: forming a hollow shell in the general shape of a diving board, the shell carrying reinforcing member supports shaped and positioned to receive elongated reinforcing members within the shell; inserting the elongated reinforcing members longitudinally into the shell and into engagement with the reinforcing member supports; and filling the shell with a flexible material. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to attach list of references cited for prior arts pertinent to claimed and unclaimed subject matter. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NYCA T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7168. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00. 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, Loan Jimenez can be reached at 571-272-4966. 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. /NYCA T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 27, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Aug 11, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594455
ELASTIC SUPPORT DEVICE AND OPTIONAL POWER SHIRT AND METHOD OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589275
Multifunctional and Adjustable Resistance Training Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576312
Device for training human's motor skills and in particular the adaptation to instability, the strength and mobility
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576298
FITNESS SYSTEM, FITNESS ASSEMBLY ARRANGEMENT AND FUNCTIONAL FITNESS ELEMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569709
DUAL MOTOR EXERCISE MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+25.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 676 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