Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/422,833

Aiming Device For Pocket Billiards

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 25, 2024
Examiner
STONER, KILEY SHAWN
Art Unit
1735
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
1148 granted / 1418 resolved
+16.0% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1466
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
44.7%
+4.7% vs TC avg
§102
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
§112
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1418 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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) 1-3, 5-9, and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Clear Plastic Ruler 12 Inch Straight Rulers, Shatterproof Ruler with Inches and Centimeters for School Classroom, Home, or Office (2pcs) (amazon.com) (hereafter Clear Ruler). With respect to claim 1, Clear Ruler teaches an aiming device for pocket billiards (the underlined portion is merely intended use), comprising: a strip having a length equal to a distance between a pair of interval markers of a plurality of interval markers on a plurality of rails of a pocket billiards table (figures; and About This Item); and a plurality of markings along a longitudinal direction of the strip, the strip is removably placeable on any of the rails between any of the pairs of interval markers (figures; and About This Item). Since the Clear Ruler is monolithic and of the claimed length (12 inches), it is intrinsically capable of being removably placeable on any of the rails between any of the pairs of interval markers of a pocket billards table. With respect to claim 2, Clear Ruler teaches wherein the markings are evenly spaced from one another along the longitudinal direction (figures; and About This Item). With respect to claim 3, Clear Ruler teaches wherein the strip has a length of approximately 11 inches to approximately 12.3 inches along the longitudinal direction (figures; and About This Item). With respect to claim 5, Clear Ruler teaches wherein the plurality of markings include a first interval of markings and a second interval of markings on a same surface of the strip (figures; and About This Item). With respect to claim 6, Clear Ruler teaches wherein the strip is translucent or opaque (figures; and About This Item). With respect to claim 7, Clear Ruler teaches wherein the strip is a polymer material (figures; and About This Item). With respect to claim 8, Clear Ruler teaches wherein the strip has a length along the longitudinal direction that is greater than a width in a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (figures; and About This Item). With respect to claim 9, Clear Ruler teaches wherein the strip is flexible (figures; and About This Item). With respect to claim 11, Clear Ruler teaches wherein the strip is monolithically formed as a single piece (figures; and About This Item). With respect to claim 12, Clear Ruler teaches wherein the markings of the strip include a first set of markings that increase in value along the longitudinal direction and a second set of markings that decrease in value along the longitudinal direction (figures; and About This Item). Claim(s) 1-6, 8, and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by C604R-12 Starrett Steel Rule (1* width x 3/64* thick) 12* long, 4R graduation https://www.mansontool.com/PROD/C604R-12.html (hereafter C604R-12). With respect to claim 1, C604R-12 teaches an aiming device for pocket billiards (the underlined portion is merely intended use), comprising: a strip having a length equal to a distance between a pair of interval markers of a plurality of interval markers on a plurality of rails of a pocket billiards table (figure; and description); and a plurality of markings along a longitudinal direction of the strip, the strip is removably placeable on any of the rails between any of the pairs of interval markers ((figure; and description). Since the C604R-12 is monolithic and of the claimed length (12 inches), it is intrinsically capable of being removably placeable on any of the rails between any of the pairs of interval markers of a pocket billards table. With respect to claim 2, C604R-12 teaches wherein the markings are evenly spaced from one another along the longitudinal direction (figure; and description). With respect to claim 3, C604R-12 teaches wherein the strip has a length of approximately 11 inches to approximately 12.3 inches along the longitudinal direction (figure; and description). With respect to claim 4, C604R-12 teaches wherein the plurality of markings include a first interval of markings on a front surface of the strip and a second interval of markings on a back surface of the strip (figure; and description). With respect to claim 5, C604R-12 teaches wherein the plurality of markings include a first interval of markings and a second interval of markings on a same surface of the strip (figure; and description). With respect to claim 6, C604R-12 teaches wherein the strip is translucent or opaque (figure; and description). With respect to claim 8, C604R-12 teaches wherein the strip has a length along the longitudinal direction that is greater than a width in a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (figure; and description). With respect to claim 10, C604R-12 teaches wherein the strip is rigid (steel is rigid in view of the broadest reasonable interpretation) (figure; and description). With respect to claim 11, C604R-12 teaches wherein the strip is monolithically formed as a single piece (figure; and description). 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. Claim(s) 13-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jauproid (US 1,058,062) in view of Ellis (US 6,875,120B1). With respect to claim 13, Jauproid teaches a method for using an aiming device for billiards, comprising: using a first marking set strip having a length equal to a distance between a pair of interval markers (diamonds 9) of a plurality of interval markers on a plurality of rails (7) of a billiards table between the pair of interval markers (figures 1-3; and page 1, line 10-page 2, line 27); deciding a player target location on the billiards table to hit a cue ball toward (figures 1-3; and page 1, line 10-page 2, line 27); using a plurality of markings along a longitudinal direction of the first strip and the pair of interval markers to determine what location the cue ball is at on the billiards table (figures 1-3; and page 1, line 10-page 2, line 27); determining where to aim the cue ball to make it move toward the player target location (figures 1-3; and page 1, line 10-page 2, line 27); using a second marking set strip having a same length as the first strip between a different pair of interval markers of the plurality of interval markers where the cue ball is to be aimed (figures 1-3; and page 1, line 10-page 2, line 27); using a plurality of markings along a longitudinal direction of the second marking set strip to determine where to hit the cue ball to make it move toward the player target location (figures 1-3; and page 1, line 10-page 2, line 27). With respect to claim 13, Jauproid does not explicitly teach wherein the billiards is pocket billiards; the first and second strip are removably placeable on the rails; and repositioning the first strip and the second strip between the plurality of interval markers based on a position of the cue ball after it is hit and where the cue ball is to be aimed for a subsequent shot. However, Ellis teaches the type of billiards is pocket billiards (column 3, lines 8-33); the measuring scale/ruler (200) is removably placeable on the rails (column 2, lines 4-10; and column 4, lines 24-33); and positioning the scale/ruler between a plurality of interval markers (pockets) (column 2, lines 4-10; and column 4, lines 24-33). Accordingly, at the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that a placeable/removable scale/ruler of Ellis can be predictably used at the locations of each the marking set strips of Jauproid in order to make the marking sets nonpermanent and removable (separable) for aesthetic purposes and/or remote cleaning. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). The claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one known element (integral marking strip) for another (placeable marking strip) would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. See MPEP 2143. With respect to claim 14, Jauproid teaches wherein the first and second marking set strips are spaced evenly (figures 1-3; and page 1, line 10-page 2, line 27). With respect to claim 15, Jauproid teaches a billiards aiming system, comprising: a billiards table having a plurality of interval markers (diamonds 9) on a plurality of rails (7); and an aiming device (marking set strip) having: a length equal to a distance between a pair of interval markers of the interval markers (figures 1-3; and page 1, line 10-page 2, line 27); and a plurality of markings along a longitudinal direction of the aiming device (figures 1 and 2). With respect to claim 15, Jauproid does not explicitly teach the type of billiards is pocket billiards; and the aiming device is removably placeable on any of the rails between any of the interval markers. However, Ellis teaches the type of billiards is pocket billiards (column 3, lines 8-33); the measuring scale/ruler (200) is removably placeable on the rails (column 2, lines 4-10; and column 4, lines 24-33). Accordingly, at the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that a placeable/removable scale/ruler of Ellis can be predictably used at the locations of each the marking set strips of Jauproid in order to make the marking sets nonpermanent and removable (separable) for aesthetic purposes and/or remote cleaning. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). The claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one known element (integral marking strip) for another (placeable marking strip) would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. See MPEP 2143. With respect to claim 16, Jauproid teaches wherein the markings are evenly spaced from one another along the longitudinal direction (figures 1-3; and page 1, line 10-page 2, line 27). With respect to claim 17, Ellis teaches wherein the pocket billiards table has a length of approximately 4 feet to approximately 9 feet (column 3, lines 41-44; and column 4, lines 28-29). With respect to claim 19, Ellis teaches wherein the aiming device (200) directly contacts the rail (column 2, lines 4-10; and column 4, lines 24-33). With respect to claim 20, Ellis teaches wherein the aiming device (200) is removably placeable on any of the rails in its entirety (column 2, lines 4-10; and column 4, lines 24-33). Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jauproid and Ellis as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Thomas (US 2004/0254024A1). With respect to claim 18, Jauproid and Ellis do not explicitly teach wherein the markings include a first set of markings that increase in value along the longitudinal direction and a second set of markings that decrease in value along the longitudinal direction. However, Thomas teaches markings include a first set of markings that increase in value along the longitudinal direction and a second set of markings that decrease in value along the longitudinal direction (figures 1 and 3). At the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the marking style of Thomas in the collective billiards system of Jauproid and Ellis in order to improve visual recognition of the marks and/or improve accuracy. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KILEY SHAWN STONER whose telephone number is (571)272-1183. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday. 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, Keith Walker can be reached on 571-272-3458. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /KILEY S STONER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 25, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599986
ULTRASONIC HORN, SECONDARY BATTERY, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592621
COLD PRESSURE WELDING APPARATUS, COIL MANUFACTURING APPARATUS, COIL, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589453
ORBITAL WELDING DEVICE WITH IMPROVED RESIDUAL OXYGEN MEASUREMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589446
WIRE-FEED FRICTION STIR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS, DEVICES, AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583062
Welding Apparatus, Welding Method, and Electrode Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
81%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+15.5%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1418 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