Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/874,047

Projectile with circumferential and/or longitudinal groove

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Dec 11, 2024
Priority
Jun 20, 2022 — DE 10 2022 115 219.7 +1 more
Examiner
ELDRED, JOHN W
Art Unit
3641
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
SwissP Defence AG
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
778 granted / 1003 resolved
+25.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
1027
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
49.0%
+9.0% vs TC avg
§102
16.7%
-23.3% vs TC avg
§112
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1003 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 2-17, 19-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In claims 2, 20, and 24, “the circumferential groove transitioning … and/or having a radius …” is alternative and indefinite. It is not clear when or how the alternative structures are to be applied or determined. In claim 24, “projections on its inner and/or outer surface” is alternative and indefinite. It is not clear when or how the alternative structures are to be applied or determined. 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 2, 3, 19, 20, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deshpande et al (9,738,947). Deshpande et al disclose a projectile 100 with all claimed elements including a projectile body 101 having a circumferential groove (i.e. any of the several circumferential grooves 106) and several radial projections 104 at a distance from each other. Deshpande et al fail to disclose any particular projectile caliber or groove width but given the conventional nature of the disclose munitions and the parameters of the projection heights, it is considered to have been an obvious engineering choice to have the claimed parameters in order to give desired functions. Also, the claimed parameters fail to provide any unexpected results. Claims 4-17, 21-23, and 26-27 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 18 is allowed. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to J. WOODROW ELDRED whose telephone number is (571)272-6901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30. 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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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. /J. Woodrow Eldred/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641 JWE
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 11, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103, §112
Mar 23, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 04, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12680775
Trigger Frame Assembly
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12669312
Soft Armor Edge Enhancement
2y 6m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12656072
CAM RACE FOR FIREARM
1y 10m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12644674
THREAT COUNTERMEASURE SYSTEM AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12636403
FIREARM TRIGGER MECHANISM
1y 4m to grant Granted May 26, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+7.9%)
2y 2m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1003 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