Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/472,633

POWER LIFT ASSIST FOR BIMINI

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Sep 22, 2023
Examiner
ABELL, TYE W
Art Unit
3644
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Commercial Sewing Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
442 granted / 516 resolved
+33.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
532
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
35.9%
-4.1% vs TC avg
§102
35.5%
-4.5% vs TC avg
§112
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 516 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status This action is in response to the application filed 22 September 2023 which claims priority to PRO 63/409,402 filed 23 September 2022. 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 § 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 7 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. The term “quick-release” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “quick-release” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examination purposes, any connection that is pinned will satisfy the limitation. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1-8, 10 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ritchel et al. (US 2021/0339829). - Regarding Claim 1. Ritchel discloses a bimini top (10, fig. 2-14) for a watercraft (14) comprising: a bimini frame (illustrated by fig. 8) including at least one bow (16a-c) and at least one support leg (26) rotatable relative to the at least one bow (illustrated by fig. 2), the bimini frame (fig. 8) being transformable between a retracted position (illustrated by fig. 6) and a stowed position (illustrated by fig. 4); and an actuator (26, “rear strut….can include cables, winches, motors, actuators…” [0064]) operable to automatically transform the bimini frame (fig. 8) between the retracted position (fig. 6) and the stowed position (fig. 4), wherein the actuator forms the at least one support leg (26, “means to (un)fold the hinges” [0064], folding/unfolding the hinges transforms the frame between the positions). - Regarding Claim 2. Ritchel discloses the bimini top of claim 1, wherein in the retracted position (fig. 6), the at least one support leg (26) is extended relative to the rear bow (16a-c) and in the stowed position (fig. 4), the at least one support leg (26) is collapsed relative to the rear bow (16 a-c, the extension and collapse are illustrated by the figures). - Regarding Claim 3. Ritchel discloses the bimini top of claim 1, wherein in the stowed position (fig. 4), the at least one support leg (26) is arranged parallel to the rear bow (16 a-c, illustrated by fig. 4). - Regarding Claim 4. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 1, wherein the at least one bow (16a-c) further comprises a front bow (22a-c) and a rear bow (16a-c) and the actuator (26) is pivotally coupled to the rear bow (16a-c, illustrated by the figures). - Regarding Claim 5. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 4, wherein the actuator (26) further comprises a stationary portion (illustrated by the mounting location of the strut to the bow) and a movable portion (28), the stationary portion being pivotally coupled to the rear bow (16a-c, the figures illustrate the pivot attachment of the strut to the rear bow). - Regarding Claim 6. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 5, wherein an end of the movable portion is rotatably coupled to a mounting bracket (the figures illustrate the rotatable coupling of the movable portion and the mounting bracket, clearly in fig. 5). - Regarding Claim 7. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 6, wherein the end of the movable portion is rotatably coupled to the mounting bracket via a quick-release connection (the figures illustrate the coupling as a pinned joint, allowing for a quick-release connection). - Regarding Claim 8. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 4, wherein the actuator (26) further comprises: a motor (“motor” [0064]) for moving the movable portion of the actuator (26, “means to (un)fold the hinges” [0064]); a sensor (“sensor” [0065]) operable to monitor a parameter of the actuator (26, “sensing an amount the hinge has rotate” [0065]); and a controller (“pressing a button or flipping a switch…upon sensing…deactivated” [0065]) operably coupled to the motor and to the sensor (“upon sensing…deactivated” [0065]), wherein the controller is configured to adjust operation of the motor in response to the parameter being monitored by the sensor (“deactivated” [0065]). - Regarding Claim 10. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 8, wherein the parameter being monitored is a position of the movable portion of the actuator (“amount the hinge has rotated” [0065]). - Regarding Claim 12. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 1, further comprising a mount (40), wherein in the stowed configuration (fig. 4), a portion of the actuator (26) is receivable within the mount (40, illustrated by fig. 4). - Regarding Claim 13. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 8, wherein the portion of the actuator (26) receivable within the mount (40) has a first configuration and an upper surface of the mount has a second configuration, the first configuration being complementary to the second configuration (fig. 4 illustrates the components nested together, allowing for complementary configurations). - Regarding Claim 14. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 1, wherein the bimini frame (fig. 8) is mountable to a deck of the watercraft (14, illustrated by the pictures). - Regarding Claim 15. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 1, wherein the bimini frame (fig. 8) is mountable to a tower structure of the watercraft (14, illustrated by the figures). 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. Claims 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritchel in view of Obviousness. - Regarding Claim 9. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 8, but does not disclose wherein the parameter being monitored by the sensor is a temperature of the motor. However, the examiner contends that it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to have a sensor monitor a motor temperature to ensure that the motor does not overheat during operation, and to ensure that the actuator is functional. Failure to monitor a temperature of a motor within an actuator of a bimini system could result in the bimini system being in an unsafe position for operation of the watercraft as a result of the actuator motor overheating, resulting in the watercraft being unsafe to operate. - Regarding Claim 11. Ritchel discloses the bimini system of claim 8, wherein the controller is configured to communicate with an output device (“pressing a button or flipping a switch” [0065]), but does not disclose the controller configured to indicate to a user operational data of the actuator including the parameter being monitored by the sensor. However, the examiner contends that it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to indicate to a user operational data of the actuator including position of the bimini system as disclosed by Ritchel, to ensure that the user is aware of the bimini system position while operating the watercraft. Failure to indicate positioning could result in unsafe operation of the watercraft. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon but considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYE W ABELL whose telephone number is (303) 297-4408. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 0700-1500 CST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Timothy Collins can be reached on 571-272-6886. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. /TYE WILLIAM ABELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3644 3 December 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 22, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600492
AEROSTAT TETHER INSTALLATION, HANDLING, DAMAGE CONTROL, AND QUICK REPLACEMENT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600453
AIR SUPPLY APPARATUS FOR A SHIP, SHIP INCLUDING THE SAME, AND METHOD OF SUPPLYING AIR TO AN AIR LUBRICATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600442
AQUATIC UTILITY VEHICLE AND SUSPENSION SYSTEM THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595046
LANDING GEAR FOR AIRCRAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590558
DRAG RECOVERY SCHEME USING BOUNDARY LAYER INGESTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+14.4%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 516 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