Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/780,227

Compression Training Apparatus

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 22, 2024
Examiner
ANDERSON, MEGAN M
Art Unit
3784
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
544 granted / 724 resolved
+5.1% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
746
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
33.0%
-7.0% vs TC avg
§102
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
§112
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 724 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This is the First Office Action on the Merits based on the 18/780,227 application filed on 07/22/2024 and which claims as originally filed have been considered in the ensuing 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/22/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings are objected to because in figure 11, labels 120 and 130 should be 220 and 230, respectively. 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 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 Kezirian et al (US 10,335,635) in view of Bell (US 9,757,617). Regarding claim 1: Kezirian et al as modified disclose that an oblong mouthpiece portion (mouthpiece 212); a shank portion (see annotated Fig. below); an attachment portion (see annotated Fig. below); the shank portion being connected between the disk portion and the attachment portion (see Fig. 2A-2B); the disk portion comprising an end opening (see Fig. 2A); the shank portion comprising an internal passage having a first end and a second end (see Fig. 2A); the attachment portion comprising a hole (see Fig. 2A); the internal passage being in fluid communication with the end opening at the first end and with the hole of the attachment portion at the second end (see Fig. 2A; the device is configured such that a user inhales and exhales through the device). [AltContent: textbox (Attachment portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Shank portion)][AltContent: arrow] PNG media_image1.png 683 466 media_image1.png Greyscale While Kezirian et al disclose that the mouthpiece is thin and flattened, Kezirian et al fails to specifically disclose that the mouthpiece is a disk portion. The Examiner notes that the disk portion of Applicant also functions as a mouthpiece. Bell discloses a mouth exerciser, with a mouthpiece in the form of a disk (145) that has a concave section (“A mouthpiece 145 may be shaped in a polygon, oval, saddle, concave, or convex shape. ” see paragraph 5 lines 50-52). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the mouthpiece of Kezirian et al to be round with a concave section, as taught by Bell, as a change of shape of an object has been held as an obvious design choice. Further, the limitation lacks criticality. Regarding claim 2: Kezirian et al as modified disclose that the end opening is located at a center of the disk portion (see Fig. 2A-2A; the device is a breathing apparatus with a continuous channel from the mouthpiece to the combined housing; while not the same embodiment, this is best shown in Fig. 1A). PNG media_image2.png 290 201 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 3: Kezirian et al as modified disclose that the disk portion further comprises a concave end surface (see rejection of claim 1 above; the mouthpiece has been modified to be a disk with a concave surface). Regarding claim 4: Kezirian et al as modified disclose that the shank portion comprises a shank wall that has a cylindrical outer surface (see Fig. 2A). Regarding claim 5: Kezirian et al as modified disclose that the internal passage is cylindrical (while not the same embodiment, this is best shown in Fig. 1A). Regarding claim 6: Kezirian et al as modified disclose that the internal passage is coaxial with the end opening and the hole (while not the same embodiment, this is best shown in Fig. 1A). Regarding claim 7: Kezirian et al as modified disclose that the shank portion further comprises a transition portion that transitions from the shank portion to the attachment portion (see annotated Fig. above; the shank portion is combined with the attachment portion such that there is a transition from the shank to the attachment portion). Claim 8 isrejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kezirian et al (US 10,335,635) and Bell (US 9,757,617) in further view of Schmidt et al (US 6,557,549). Kezirian et al as modified discloses the device as substantially claimed above. Regarding claim 8: Kezirian et al as modified fails to disclose a manometer attached to the attachment portion. However, Kezirian et al does disclose different components attached to the attachment portion, including different components that respond differently to different pressures. Schmidt et al teaches a positive expiratory pressure apparatus with an attachment end configured to have a manometer (see paragraph 7 lines 58-64). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kezirian et al to optionally have a manometer attachment, as taught by Schmidt et al, to show the exerciser the pressure that is being generated during the workout. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 9 is 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEGAN M ANDERSON whose telephone number is (313)446-6531. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6 a.m. -4 p.m. (Arizona). 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, LoAn Jimenez can be reached at 571-272-4966. 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. /Megan Anderson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 22, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599826
RAGE RELIEVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576299
EXERCISE AND THERAPY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564759
STAIR STEPPER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558584
Resistance adjustment device of exercise apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12558592
TREADMILL CAPABLE OF ADJUSTING SLOPE RISING AND FALLING BY SCREW ROD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.1%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 724 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