Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 18/428,520

MARINE ADAPTIVE BATTERY LOCATION SYSTEM

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 31, 2024
Priority
Jan 31, 2023 — provisional 63/442,251
Examiner
VENNE, DANIEL V
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Polaris Industries Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allowance Rate
1186 granted / 1663 resolved
+19.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+15.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1695
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
31.6%
-8.4% vs TC avg
§102
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
§112
44.6%
+4.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1663 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . An amendment after a Non-Final Rejection was filed by applicant on 07/14/2026. Claims 1, 5, 16, 19 and 20 are amended. Claims 1-20 are remaining in the application. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed limitation: “track mounting features” must be shown as recited (it is suggested that such be shown with an appropriate reference character corresponding to this feature(s) in the specification) or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Appropriate correction is required. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the above feature(s) (with appropriate reference characters corresponding to the feature(s) in the written description) consistent with the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. No new matter should be entered. In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informality: The Specification does not refer to the drawings regarding the feature indicated in paragraphs 5 and 6 of this Office Action. Appropriate correction is required. The Specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The newly claimed feature limitation “track mounting features” is not found nor described in the Specification as recited in the claims. Claim limitations should be consistent with features found in and described in Specification; in addition, terminology and/or nomenclature should be consistent throughout the disclosure (Abstract, Specification and Claims). It is noted that the Specification describes “track mounting fixtures” not “track mounting features”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 11. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): 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. 12. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor, regards as the invention. 13. The claimed limitation “track mounting features” (independent claim 1 and subsequent dependent claims) is unclear in light of the Specification. Such limitation is not found in nor described in the Specification; therefore, the requisite material or structure for such limitation cannot be determined. It is noted that the Specification describes “track mounting fixtures” not “track mounting features”. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 16-20 are allowed. Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action. Claims 2-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been fully considered but are considered essentially moot due to applicant’s amended claims and the resulting new and/or modified grounds of rejection presented in this Final Office Action. Conclusion 18. 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. 19. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL V VENNE whose telephone number is (571) 272-7947. The examiner can normally be reached between M-F, 7am-3:30pm Flex. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Marc Q Jimenez, who can be reached at phone number (571) 272-4530. 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). 20. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Daniel V Venne/ Senior Examiner, Art Unit 3615B 07/24/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 31, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jul 14, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 28, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12686471
ADJUSTABLE AQUACULTURE APPARATUS
4y 8m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12686479
Marine vessel propulsion machine ventilation apparatus and marine vessel propulsion machine
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12686469
MODULAR INFLATABLE ENTERTAINMENT VENUE
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12679513
FIN STABILIZER
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12679507
FLOATING BODY WITHOUT SEPARATE CONNECTION DEVICE AND CONNECTION METHOD THEREOF
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+15.0%)
2y 2m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1663 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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