Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/778,431

AUTOMATED FLUSHING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 19, 2024
Priority
Jul 19, 2023 — provisional 63/514,486
Examiner
WIEST, ANTHONY D
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Reverso Pumps LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allowance Rate
647 granted / 912 resolved
+10.9% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+34.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
925
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
76.6%
+36.6% vs TC avg
§102
4.9%
-35.1% vs TC avg
§112
15.6%
-24.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 912 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Claims 1-20 are pending in the current application. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “234” has been used to designate both an inlet channel (see Fig. 4) and an outlet channel (see Fig. 9). 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. 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. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “226” has been used to designate both a flow manifold (Fig. 3) and a pressure sensor (Fig. 11, the examiner believes the pressure sensor should be identified with #224). 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. 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. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph [0017]: The second recitation of “Figure 8” should be changed to “Figure 7”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 20 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Napurano et al., US, 9517495 (disclosed by applicant). Napurano discloses a method of operating a flushing system comprising an inlet port (104), two or more outlet ports (106), an inlet channel in fluid communication with the inlet port, two or more outlet channels (112) in fluid communication with the inlet channel and the two or more outlet ports, and an outlet valve (114) provided in each of the two or more outlet channels (ca be connected to two or more motors, or other systems), the method comprising: opening one of the two or more outlet valves; waiting for a predetermined cycle time; closing the outlet valve after the predetermined cycle time has expired; and repeating the steps of opening, waiting, and closing for each of the two or more outlet valves (see column 7, line 35 – column 8, line 61). Napurano further discloses a start switch (134) which can be remotely locate and a pressure sensor (116) to detect an inlet water pressure and compare it to a minimum threshold pressure value and to alert the user (LED 148 displays an alarm status alerting the user) when the inlet pressure does not meet the predetermined threshold. 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. Claim 1-12, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 being unpatentable over Napurano. Regarding claim 1: Napurano discloses a flushing system for flushing the cooling system of a marine motor comprising: an inlet port (104) an inlet channel in fluid communication with the inlet port, the inlet channel being formed by a main body of a flow manifold (108); a plurality of outlet channels (112) in fluid communication with the inlet channel and a plurality of outlet valves (114), wherein each outlet valve comprises a valve inlet that is connected to an outlet interface of the main body of the flow manifold (108), a plurality of outlet ports (106), each outlet port in fluid communication with one of the plurality of outlet valves(114); an actuator attached to each of the plurality of outlet valves; and a controller (126) configured to control each of the actuators to actuate each of the outlet valves to permit water to flow from the inlet port to each of the outlet ports. Napurano does not explicitly disclose wherein the valve inlet comprises a plurality of O-ring seals for forming a water-tight connection between the valve inlet and the outlet interface. O-rings are common features used when installing valves in water distribution systems to create watertight seals between connecting parts. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to install O-rings to create a water tight seal around the valve connections. Regarding claim 2: see pressure switch (116) which is in fluid communication with the inlet channel. Regarding claims 3 and 4 : see start switch (132) can be on the cover (126) or remotely located. Regarding claim 5, 6 and 15: Pilot actuated valves (including solenoid valves) are well known in the art and would be an obvious design choice modification made by an artisan (as an example see US 5299592). Additionally opening and closing (or partially opening and closing) the outlet valves by rotation of the actuator would be a simple design choice made by an artisan when selecting from the wide range of known valve options. Regarding claim 7: see Fig. 5 showing a watertight enclosure encompassing the claimed features. Regarding claims 10-12: Location of the flushing port on the exterior of a boat hull, mounting the flushing system on an adjacent dock, and having the inlet port accessible on an exterior of a boat hull are simple design choices easily made by an artisan when contemplating use of the flushing system and convenience to the operator. Regarding claim 18: Napurano discloses a controller configured to actuate the two or more outlet valves. Sending a pulsed control signal is a common feature of solenoid valves (for instance see US 11980902 col 6, lines 50-64) and would be a simple design choice when selecting from widely known valve types. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 5299592 and US 11980902 disclose typical examples of valves and valve operating systems. US 7666043 discloses an automatic heat exchanger flushing system. US 7150665 discloses a flushing system for simultaneously flushing multiple outboard motors. US 6645024 discloses a fresh water marine engine flushing system. US 5362266 discloses a freshwater flushing system for a marine engine including a control panel mounted on the boat interior. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D WIEST whose telephone number is (571)270-5974. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00 - 3:00. 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, Marc Jimenez can be reached at 571 272 4530. 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. /ANTHONY D WIEST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 19, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12679508
METHOD FOR INSTALLING AT LEAST ONE MOORING LINE OF A FLOATING INSTALLATION IN A BODY OF WATER AND ASSOCIATED FLOATING INSTALLATION
3y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12679522
WATERCRAFT PROPULSION SYSTEM, AND WATERCRAFT
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12679520
UPRIGHTING DEVICE FOR AN UNDERWATER VEHICLE
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12668330
MOORING SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES FOR USING SAME
3y 4m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12643631
JET-PROPELLED WATER-ENTRY COMPOSITE BUFFER DEVICE FOR MULTI-CHANNEL GAS RECYCLING
2y 11m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+34.8%)
2y 2m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 912 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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