Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/527,607

Wave Stabilization System

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Dec 04, 2023
Examiner
VENNE, DANIEL V
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Fredricks Equipment Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
1162 granted / 1635 resolved
+19.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
1686
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
31.1%
-8.9% vs TC avg
§102
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
§112
43.8%
+3.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1635 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Claims 1-17 are pending in the application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claims 8 and 13-15 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. Claim 8, which is dependent on claim 1, recites a plurality of second reinforcing members where first reinforcing members are not recited prior in claim 1, making such unclear. It is presumed that the recited “each plurality of support arms” is intended to be -each support arm of the plurality of support arms- in claims 8 and 13-15 but this is not entirely clear and needs to be clarified in these claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 7. 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. As best understood by the examiner, claims 1-3, 6, 9-11 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D1: US 8844456 B2 (Lambrakos et al.), cited by examiner. Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, D1 discloses (see Figs. 1-22) all specifically claimed features, including wave stabilization system [2] for use with a structure with positive buoyancy that floats on a body of water at a wave action plane; a stabilization plane (heave plate) [10, 10A, 10B, … 10X] submerged below the wave action plane (waterline); wherein the stabilization plane is attached to the structure by a plurality of support arms [36]. Reinforcing members are structure [24] attached to support arms [36]. It is presumed that the recited each plurality of support arms is intended to be -each support arm of the plurality of support arms- in claims 8 and 13-15. Regarding claims 2, 3, 6, 10, 11, 14, 16 and 17, see Figs. 1-22 and corresponding written description: heave plates [10A, 10B] are movable in relation to the waterline and can be angled such that they can be parallel or nonparallel to the waterline; similarly, the heave plates can be either uniform or nonuniform in relation to distance from the waterline; each reinforcing member of a plurality of reinforcing members are attached to a respective one of a plurality of support arms and the structure; heave plates may be adjusted as desired for desired stability. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 9. 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. As best understood by the examiner, claims 4, 5, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1: US 8844456 B2 (Lambrakos et al.), cited by examiner. D1 discloses all claimed features as indicated previously, except the specific number of support arms and being of adjustable length, and a plurality of second reinforcing members attached to each one of the plurality of support arms. D1 discloses that the length of the support arms (braces) [36] can vary to position the angle for the heave plates as desired. Providing more than one support arm or reinforcing member; in particular, any number of additional support arms or reinforcing members, would have been considered obvious as a matter of design option to reinforce or strengthen the structure as desired, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, it would have been considered 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 to provide such features to facilitate versatility for stability as desired, and to facilitate increased strength and durability for the device as desired, with a reasonable expectation of success, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. The rejection combines known features to achieve expected results; no unknown features or unexpected results are achieved for the claimed subject matter. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 12 is 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. Claim 13 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. Conclusion 14. The prior art cited and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The prior art references disclose stabilization systems with heave plates for floating structures. 15. 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, Samuel J. Morano can be reached on (571) 272-6684. 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). 16. 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 3615 02/06/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 04, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600446
DEVICES AND SYSTEMS FOR MOUNTING A TRANSDUCER WITHIN A WATERCRAFT HULL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595030
HULL-MOUNTED INSTALLATION CONVERSION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595034
Variable Angle Rudder Lift Actuation Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589834
DEVICE FOR CONNECTING TWO PARTS OF A HULL OF A SHIP, AND HULL OF A SHIP COMPRISING SUCH A DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583561
SAILING BOAT WITH AN AUXILIARY HYDRODYNAMIC SURFACE
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
71%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+14.9%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1635 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