Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/528,928

FLOATING WATER HEATING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Dec 05, 2023
Examiner
BURGESS, MARC R
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
34%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
56%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 34% of cases
34%
Career Allow Rate
164 granted / 477 resolved
-17.6% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
69 currently pending
Career history
546
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
48.8%
+8.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.1%
-18.9% vs TC avg
§112
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 477 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to because they comprise improper shading, and are not strictly black and white line drawings. 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. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 9 recites “the heating element configured to receiving electrical power.” This should be --the heating element configured to receive electrical power--. Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2 recites “the buoyant member will floating.” The claim should be rephrased as -- the buoyant member is ballasted such that when the buoyant member is floating, the surface level of water will be above…-- or similar. Appropriate correction is required. 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 4 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. Claim 4 line 1 recites “wherein there are multiple heating elements.” It is unclear if these include the “heating element” recited in parent claim 1, or if these are all new elements. It is also unclear if the location is meant to apply to the previously recited heating element. 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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seccareccia US 2013/0145538 in view of Huang US 2018/0031272. Regarding claim 1, Seccareccia teaches a floating water heating system comprising: a buoyant member 13, 16 having an outer surface, a top surface, and an inner surface, the inner surface defining a central passage through the buoyant member; a number of solar cells 12 coupled to the top surface of the buoyant member; and a heating element 22 coupled to the buoyant member near the bottom of the buoyant member, the heating element configured to receive electrical power from at least of the one solar cells; the buoyant member being ballasted such that the surface level of water in which the buoyant member will float is above the bottom wall of the buoyant member (see figure 4b). Note that when a series of covers are connected, the spacing between units can be considered the central passage. In an alternative interpretation, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the cover hollow/toroidal or of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient in order to fit the desired water surface are, use less material and/or achieve the desired aesthetic appearance. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. Seccareccia does not teach that the buoyant member has at least one channel extending therethrough from the inner surface to the outer surface, the channel having side walls and a bottom wall, the channel having a height extending from the bottom wall, the heating element coupled to the buoyant member near the bottom wall of the channel. Huang teaches a water heating system comprising channels 13 having side walls and a bottom wall, the channel having a height extending from the bottom wall, with a heating element 11, 12 coupled near the bottom wall of the channel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the floating water heater of Seccareccia with water channels through the body near the heating elements as taught by Huang in order to encourage more efficient heat transfer between the heat elements and water while keeping the elements protected inside the body of the float. Note that as modified, the surface level of water in which the buoyant member will float is above the bottom wall of the channel, and the channel extends therethrough from the inner surface to the outer surface. Regarding claim 2, Seccareccia and Huang teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Seccareccia does not teach that the buoyant member is circular in shape, however it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the cover circular/toroidal or of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient in order to fit the desired water surface are, use less material and/or achieve the desired aesthetic appearance. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. Regarding claim 3, Seccareccia and Huang teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Neither Seccareccia nor Huang teach that the buoyant member is ballasted such that the surface level of water in which the buoyant member is floating is above the bottom wall of the channel between one-quarter to three-quarters of the height to the channel, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to ballast the device in order to obtain the desired fluid level in the channels, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Regarding claim 4, Seccareccia and Huang teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Seccareccia also teaches that multiple heating elements 22 coupled to the buoyant member 13, 16 near the bottom wall of the channel. Regarding claim 5, Seccareccia and Huang teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Seccareccia also teaches that the buoyant member 13, 16 is ballasted such that it may be used as a floatation aid by a human (as is anything that floats). Regarding claim 6, Seccareccia and Huang teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Huang also teaches that the heating element 11, 12 is exposed to the channel 13. In this interpretation, the heat conductor portion 11 of the element directly contacts the channel. Regarding claim 7, Seccareccia and Huang teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Huang also teaches that the heating element 12 is sealed from the channel 13. In this interpretation, the PTC heater portion 12 of the element is separated from the channel by the heat conductor portion 11. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seccareccia US 2013/0145538 in view of Huang US 2018/0031272 and Hare US 2010/0282240. Regarding claim 2, Seccareccia and Huang teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Seccareccia does not teach that the buoyant member is circular in shape. Hare teaches a circular floating pool heater. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the floating water heater of Seccareccia to be circular as taught by Hare in order to fit the desired water surface are, use less material and/or achieve the desired aesthetic appearance. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Barksdale US 2024/0102697, Hirsch US 2023/0167651, Mireshghi US 9,200,465 and Swanljung US 2006/0070620 teach floating pool heaters that use solar power to circulate water through a solar heater. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marc Burgess whose telephone number is (571)272-9385. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 08:30-15:00. 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, Samuel (Joseph) Morano can be reached at 517 272-6684. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of 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. /MARC BURGESS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 05, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12454342
ADAPTABLE THROTTLE UNITS FOR MARINE DRIVES AND METHODS FOR INSTALLING THEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
Patent 12356953
INTELLIGENT CAT LITTER BOX
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 15, 2025
Patent 11524761
STRINGER-FRAME INTERSECTION OF AIRCRAFT BODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 13, 2022
Patent 11240999
FISHING ROD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 08, 2022
Patent 11130565
ELECTRIC TORQUE ARM HELICOPTER WITH AUTOROTATION SAFETY LANDING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 28, 2021
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
34%
Grant Probability
56%
With Interview (+21.1%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 477 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