Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/679,810

Paint Marking Device with Forearm Support

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 31, 2024
Examiner
CHIANG, JENNIFER C
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Flagshooter Holdings LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
694 granted / 986 resolved
At TC average
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
1004
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
41.5%
+1.5% vs TC avg
§102
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§112
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 986 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
/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 . Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in ¶ [0026], elements 11 and 12 are described as multiple parts such as rail, distal can holster due to mistyping. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claims 2, 9, 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: dependent on itself. Therefore, claim 2 is interpreted to depend from claim 1; claim 9 is interpreted to depend from claim 8; and claim 15 is interpreted to depend from claim 14. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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) 1-10, 13, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (JP H09118378A), in view of Morgan (US 6,016,620). Regarding claim 1, Tanaka teaches a marker stick comprising: a. a rail (1) having a proximal end (near 16) and a distal end (near 9); b. a trigger grip (17) attached to the rail at its proximal end (Fig 1); d. a first can holster (11) connected to the rail at its distal end, the holster configured to hold a spray can (Fig 4); e. an engagement mechanism at the distal end of the rail operable by the trigger grip (comprised of 6, 2 & 3), the engagement mechanism configured to engage a spray valve of the spray can (Machine Translation Pg 2, section [0009]). Tanaka teaches substantially all features of the claimed invention except for c. a forearm support attached to the trigger grip. Attention is directed to Morgan that teaches a forearm support (12 & 108) attached to the trigger grip (40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a forearm support attached to the trigger grip, in view of Morgan's teaching. A forearm support would provide more stability of the device for the user while using said device, cause less fatigue and improve ergonomics. Regarding claim 2, in addition to the limitations of claim 1, the already modified marker stick further teaches wherein the angle of the forearm support relative to the trigger grip can be set at a desired angle (via adjusting 15 & 16 of Tanaka). Regarding claim 3, in addition to the limitations of claim 1, the already modified marker stick further teaches wherein the forearm support further comprises a rod 24; and a cuff (138) that is moveable along the rod to be closer to or farther away from the trigger grip (Morgan: Col 4, Ln 29-46). Regarding claim 4, in addition to the limitations of claim 1, the already modified marker stick further teaches wherein the angle of the trigger grip relative to the rail is adjustable (via adjusting 15 & 16 of Tanaka). Regarding claim 5, in addition to the limitations of claim 1, the already modified marker stick further teaches 5 wherein the angle of the trigger grip relative to the rail can be set at a desired angle (via adjusting 15 & 16 of Tanaka). Regarding claim 6, in addition to the limitations of claim 1, the already modified marker stick further teaches 6 wherein the rail length is adjustable (Tanaka Machine Translation Pg 2, section [0005], last 3 lines). Regarding claim 7, in addition to the limitations of claim 1, the already modified marker stick further teaches wherein the length of the device between the trigger grip and the nozzle of the spray can is adjustable (via 14 & 15 of Tanaka; MT Pg 2, section [0005], last 3 lines). Regarding claim 8, Tanaka teaches a marker stick comprising: a. a rail (1) having a proximal end (near 16) and a distal end (near 9); b. a trigger grip (17) attached to the rail at its proximal end (Fig 1); d. a first can holster (11) connected to the rail at its distal end, the holster configured to hold a spray can (Fig 4); e. a pull rod (6) connected to the trigger and extending to a cam assembly (9, 2, 3, & 8) at the distal end of the rail, wherein the cam assembly is connected to an actuator (19) configured to move perpendicularly to a spray valve of the spray can (Machine Translation Pg 2, section [0009]). Tanaka teaches substantially all features of the claimed invention except for c. a forearm support attached to the trigger grip. Attention is directed to Morgan that teaches a forearm support (12 & 108) attached to the trigger grip (40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a forearm support attached to the trigger grip, in view of Morgan's teaching. A forearm support would provide more stability of the device for the user while using said device, cause less fatigue and improve ergonomics. Regarding claim 9, in addition to the limitations of claim 8, the already modified marker stick further teaches 6 wherein the rail length is adjustable (Tanaka: Machine Translation Pg 2, section [0005], last 3 lines). Regarding claim 10, in addition to the limitations of claim 8, the already modified marker stick further teaches wherein the length of the device between the trigger grip and the nozzle of the spray can is adjustable (via 14 & 15 of Tanaka; MT Pg 2, section [0005], last 3 lines). Regarding claim 16, Tanaka teaches a marker stick comprising: a. a rail (1) having a proximal end (near 16) and a distal end (near 9); b. a trigger grip (17) pivotably attached to the rail at its proximal end (via 15 & 16); d. a first can holster (11) connected to the rail at its distal end, the holster configured to hold a spray can (Fig 4); e. an actuator (19) operable by the trigger (Machine Translation Pg 2, section [0009]). Tanaka teaches substantially all features of the claimed invention except for c. a forearm support pivotably attached to the trigger grip. Attention is directed to Morgan that teaches a forearm support (12 & 108) pivotably attached (via 116; Col 5, Ln 29-34) to the trigger grip (40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a forearm support pivotably attached to the trigger grip, in view of Morgan's teaching. A forearm support that also pivots would provide more stability of the device for the user while using said device, cause less fatigue and improve ergonomics. Regarding claim 17, in addition to the limitations of claim 16, the already modified marker stick further teaches wherein the forearm support further comprises a rod 24; and a cuff (138) that is moveable along the rod to be closer to or farther away from the trigger grip (Morgan: Col 4, Ln 29-46). Regarding claim 18, in addition to the limitations of claim 16, the already modified marker stick further teaches an adjustable strap (Morgan: 142, 144, adjustable via 152; Fig 7) that cooperates with the cuff to hold the user’s forearm securely in the cuff against the rod (Morgan: Col 5, Ln 50-60). Regarding claim 19, in addition to the limitations of claim 16, the already modified marker stick further teaches 6 wherein the rail length is adjustable (Tanaka Machine Translation Pg 2, section [0005], last 3 lines). Regarding claim 20, in addition to the limitations of claim 16, the already modified marker stick further teaches wherein the length of the device between the trigger grip and the nozzle of the spray can is adjustable (via 14 & 15 of Tanaka; MT Pg 2, section [0005], last 3 lines). Claim(s) 11-12, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified device of Tanaka, as applied in claim 8. Regarding claims 11, 14 and 15, the modified device of Tanaka is silent regarding a paint deflector attached to the distal end of the first can holster, at least one loop, and a carrying sling connected to the at least one loop. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to add a paint deflector, at least one loop, and a carrying sling connected to the at least one loop as a matter or design choice, since it was known in the art that paint deflectors, loops and carrying slings connected to loops are old and well known and used in many industries. Applicant also has not disclosed that paint deflectors, loops and carrying slings connected to loops achieve any unexpected result other than an already known results of deflecting paint and portability. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to further modify Tanaka to arrive at the claimed invention as specified in claims 11, 14-15 because such a modification would have been a mere design consideration. (See MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A)). Regarding claim 12, the modified device of Tanaka is silent regarding a second can holster connected to the rail between the first can holster and the trigger grip. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use at second can holster between the first can holster and the trigger grip as a matter of design choice, since it had been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only ordinary skill in the art. Applicant also has not disclosed that adding a second can holster achieve any unexpected result other than an already known results of using spray paint cans to surfaces. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to further modify Tanaka to arrive at the claimed invention as specified in claims 12 because such a modification would have been a mere design consideration. (See MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A)). Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified device of Tanaka, as applied in claim 8, in further view of Carrette (US 8,656,857). Regarding claims 13, the modified device of Tanaka is silent regarding a flag holder connected to the rail. Attention is directed to Carrette that teaches a flag holder (34, Fig 14A) connected to the rail (100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a flagholder to the rail, in view of Carrette's teaching. A flag holder that holds flags is often added to spray paint marking devices as an additional method of making a mark or indication on a surface when using spray paint would not be as effective. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 10,315,834 to Carrette is directed to the state of the art as relevant teachings of the claimed invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER C CHIANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5613. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10 AM- 6 PM EST. 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, Paul Durand can be reached at (571) 272-4459. 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. /JENNIFER C CHIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 31, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599218
COSMETIC APPLICATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593868
DISPENSER FOR DISCHARGING A NICOTINE- AND/OR CANNABIS-CONTAINING FLUID
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12569867
APPARATUS FOR USE WITH MULTIPLE COUPLEABLE ACCESSORIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569868
PUMP DISPENSER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12566013
WATER-DISPENSING SYSTEM FOR GENERATING BOILED WATER OF DIFFERENT TEMPERATURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
70%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+30.0%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 986 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