Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/564,781

SAIL PROPULSION ELEMENT, SAIL-PROPELLED VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 28, 2023
Examiner
AVILA, STEPHEN P
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
COMPAGNIE GÉNÉRALE DES ÉTABLISSEMENTS MICHELIN
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
1541 granted / 1921 resolved
+28.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1961
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
61.3%
+21.3% vs TC avg
§102
9.8%
-30.2% vs TC avg
§112
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1921 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim(s) 14, 17-18, 22 and 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Petretto (US 6892659; cited by Applicant) in view of Hill (US 5931109; cited by Applicant). With respect to claim 14, Petretto discloses the basic claimed structure including a sail propulsion element with a mast (column 2, lines 22-23), an inflatable sail 2 consisting essentially of two adjacent surfaces 4, 6 that are substantially leakproof and connected to one another over their periphery, thus forming at least one closed cavity around the mast (Figure 1; column 2, lines 12-26), the sail having an upper portion, a lower portion, a leading edge and a trailing edge (Figure 1), at least one air duct 14 arranged between the inside and the outside of the cavity of the sail (column 2, lines 24-26), at least one means for injecting air into the cavity (inherently), the sail once inflated, having a profile that remains permanently symmetrical , regardless of the movement of the propulsion element, the direction or the intensity of the wind (ribs 12 maintain the airfoil shape, for example), a head (Figure 1) arranged on the upper portion of the sail, the sail having a plurality of cells 11 (note also column 2, lines 16-18) in the direction of the span of the sail, each cell 11 extending from the leading edge to the trailing edge (Figure 1), the cells 11 being spaced apart by a rib 1. Not disclosed by Petretto is the sail propulsion element having a sail receptacle arranged between the leading and trailing edges over the sail lower portion and the ribs being made of a first flexible material to allow air to pass through. Hill teaches a sail propulsion element having a sail receptacle arranged between the leading and trailing edges over the sail lower portion and the ribs being made of a first flexible material to allow air to pass through (Figures 4a, 4b; column 9, lines 22-24). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the device of Petretto with a sail propulsion element having a sail receptacle arranged between the leading and trailing edges over the sail lower portion and the ribs being made of a first flexible material to allow air to pass through as taught by Hill with a high likelihood of success for improved air control and improved vessel propulsion. The combination combines known features to achieve predictable results. Note also that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have some years of experience and be familiar with various known sails systems. With respect to claims 25-26, note Petretto, column 2, lines 22-23. With respect to claims 17-18 and 22, it would have been an obvious choice of engineering design to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the device of Petretto with the claimed mesh size and to form the spacing of cells as claimed with a high likelihood of success for improved air flow control. The combination combines known features to achieve predictable results. Claims 15-16, 19-21 and 23-24 are 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. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ferronniere (GB 2151199 A) shows an inflatable sail. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN AVILA whose telephone number is (571)272-6678. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 6-4. 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 J. Morano can be reached at 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 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. STEPHEN AVILA Primary Examiner Art Unit 3617 /STEPHEN P AVILA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 28, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 28, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600450
STERN DRIVES HAVING STEERABLE GEARCASE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600449
MARINE VESSELS HAVING A FIRST MARINE DRIVE AND A SECOND MARINE DRIVE AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING THEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595036
RIM-DRIVEN MOTOR FOR PERSONAL WATERCRAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594799
AMPHIBIOUS VEHICLE WITH ADJUSTABLE COMPONENTS FOR USE IN A LIQUID MANURE LAGOON
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583567
SMALL MARINE VESSEL CAPABLE IN WHICH ACTION POSITION OF THRUST FORCE IS CHANGEABLE
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
80%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+10.1%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1921 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