Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/562,004

IMPROVEMENTS IN OR RELATING TO A DEVICE FOR USE ON WATER

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Nov 17, 2023
Examiner
VENNE, DANIEL V
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Railscape Technologies Limited
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 . A preliminary amendment was filed by applicant on 11/17/2023. Claims 1-15 are canceled. Claims 16-30 are new and substantially correspond to original claims 1-15. The amended Abstract and Specification are accepted, except as otherwise noted. Claims 16-30 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 features: payload, continuous track, camera, fuel cell and remote control must be shown (it is suggested that the features be shown with appropriate reference characters corresponding to the 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) 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(s) indicated in paragraphs 7 and 8 of this Office Action. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 12. 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. 13. Claims 16-30 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. 14. The claimed features “the base” (should be substantially planar base) and “the water” (should be water) lack sufficient antecedent basis as recited in the claims (independent claim 1 and subsequent dependent claims). Similar applies to “the track” (should be the continuous track) in claim 20, “the magnitude” (should be a magnitude) in claim 23, “the propulsive force” (should be a propulsive force) in claims 23 and 27, “the corresponding turbomachine” (should be a corresponding turbomachine) in claim 24, “the line” (should be a line) in claim 27, and “the total power output” (should be a total power output) in line 2 of claim 29. 15. The phrase “in required” on lines 2 and 4 of claim 29 is unclear as recited (it is presumed that this should be is required but this construal is not entirely clear). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 16. 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 16, 17, 19, 21-24 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D1: WO 2018/197749 A1 (Hakala et al.), cited by applicant. Regarding claim 16, D1 discloses a device for use on water (vehicle) [400] (Figs. 4-7), comprising: a hull (see Figs. 5A and 5B) having a substantially planar base; and a propulsion system (propeller towers) [401, 402, 403, 404] comprising a plurality of turbomachines [411, 412, 413, 414] configured to propel the device [400] in any direction across a plane substantially parallel to the base, wherein the propulsion system is located above the water (as seen in Fig. 5B, wherein line [512] represents the water surface), in use, wherein each turbomachine is attached to a corresponding pylon (mounting seats) [421, 422, 423, 424] having corresponding hinges (pivot points) [431, 432, 433, 434], and wherein each turbomachine is configured to rotate about its hinge (see also the written description on pg. 9, Iines 6 - 18). Regarding claims 17, 19, 21-24 and 27, see Figs. 4-8 and corresponding written description (in particular: see written description: pg. 9, lines 6-18; pg. 16, lines 31-36; and pg. 19, lines 4-14). As best understood by the examiner, claims 16-19, 21-27 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D2: KR 2017/0061865 A (Jang et al.), cited by applicant. Regarding claim 16, D2 discloses a device for use on water [100] (Figs. 1-6), comprising: a hull (float) [110] having a substantially planar base; and a propulsion system (thrusters) [130] comprising a plurality of turbomachines [134] configured to propel the device [100] in any direction across a plane substantially parallel to the base, wherein the propulsion system [130] is located above the water (Figs. 1-4), in use, wherein each turbomachine [134] is attached to a corresponding pylon [132] having a corresponding hinge [136], and wherein each turbomachine is configured to rotate about its hinge. See Figs. 1-6 and corresponding written description. Regarding claims 17-19, 21-27 and 30, see Figs. 1-6 and corresponding written description (in particular: see written description paragraphs [0046], [0047] and [0056]). D2 discloses all features above, including axes, circular base, payload and remote control. As best understood by the examiner, claims 16, 17, 19-24, 26, 27 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D3: US 2016/114887 A1 (Zhou et al.), cited by applicant. Regarding claim 16, D3 discloses a device for (capable of) use on water (VTOL vehicle) (Figs. 1-22, various embodiments), comprising: a hull (body) having a substantially planar base; and a propulsion system comprising a plurality of turbomachines (propellers) configured to propel the device in any direction across a plane substantially parallel to the base, wherein the propulsion system is located above the water, in use, wherein each turbomachine is attached to a corresponding pylon (extending structure) having a corresponding hinge (pivot), and wherein each turbomachine is configured to rotate about its hinge (see also the written description on pg. 9, Iines 6 - 18). Regarding claims 17, 19-24, 26, 27 and 30, see Figs. 1-4 (+) and corresponding written description (in particular: paragraphs [008], [0042], [0044] and [0054]. D3 discloses all above features, including track, camera and remote control; see para. [0042]. As best understood by the examiner, claims 16, 19 and 21-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D4: US 1842125 A (Schwarz), cited by applicant. Regarding claim 16, D4 discloses a device for use on water (vehicle) (Figs. 1-7), comprising: a hull [8] having a substantially planar base; and a propulsion system [9] comprising a plurality of turbomachines (propellers) [21] configured to propel the device in any direction across a plane substantially parallel to the base, wherein the propulsion system is located above the water, wherein line [512] represents the water surface), in use, wherein each turbomachine is attached to a corresponding pylon (pedestal) [11] having a corresponding hinge (rotatable pivots) and wherein each turbomachine is configured to rotate about its hinge. See Figs. 1-7. Regarding claims 19 and 21-27, see Figs. 1-7 and additional corresponding written description. 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. As best understood by the examiner, claims 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over any of D1-D4, further in view of D5: US 10065524 B2 (Lee et al.). D1-D4 disclose all claimed features as indicated previously, except wherein the fuel cell and battery arrangement and configuration recited. However, D5 discloses such features (see col. 2, lines 49-55 and col. 6, lines 14-26) with disclosure of a battery connected in series with a fuel cell and control of power output from the fuel cell and battery as desired to drive a motor for a vehicle which can be a marine vehicle. Therefore, it would have been considered obvious 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 to provide such features to facilitate power output as desired utilizing a fuel cell and a battery to power the propulsion system of the device, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. The particular percentage of total power output for either the fuel cell or battery would have been considered a matter of control and/or design option for the propulsion system, as would have also 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. Conclusion 23. The prior art cited and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The prior art references cited by the examiner disclose marine propulsion devices acting on air. 24. 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). 25. 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 02/05/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 17, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 05, 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