Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/526,476

Device For Indicating Tidal Water Depth

Final Rejection §102§DP
Filed
Dec 01, 2023
Examiner
ALLEN, ANDRE J
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Wiesconcepts LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
1304 granted / 1425 resolved
+23.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
1452
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§103
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
§102
34.6%
-5.4% vs TC avg
§112
28.2%
-11.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1425 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DP
DETAILED ACTION 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 2. Acknowledgement is made of the timely response to the 2/5/2025 Non-Final Rejection filed 8/5/2025. Response to Amendment 3. Acknowledgement is made of the timely response to the amendment(s) to claims 1, 2 and new claims 18-21 in the Request for Reconsideration filed 8/5/2025. Double Patenting 4. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,852,477. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the cited ‘477 patent teaches all of the basic features of the claimed invention. Response to Arguments 5. Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Arguments page 2, filed 8/5/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 & 2 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Conclusion 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE J ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2174. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 9am-5PM. 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, Kristina M Deherrera can be reached at (303) 297-4237. 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. /ANDRE J ALLEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 01, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §DP
Aug 05, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600515
METHOD FOR MONITORING THE SEALING OF A CONTAINER AND DEVICE WITH IMPROVED SEALING MONITORING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598716
SENSOR DEVICE AND VALVE ASSEMBLY WITH IMPROVED SEALING FEATURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596045
Pressure Sensor and Pressure Relief Valve Testing
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596044
PRESSURE SENSOR HAVING AN ELASTIC CONDUCTIVE MEMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590858
PROTECTIVE CAP FOR PRESSURE SENSORS
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
92%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+6.2%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1425 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