Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/914,765

MODULAR FIREARM AND COMPONENTS THEREOF

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 14, 2024
Examiner
DAVID, MICHAEL D
Art Unit
3641
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Evolved Gear LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
361 granted / 443 resolved
+29.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
460
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
36.7%
-3.3% vs TC avg
§102
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§112
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 443 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 . Applicant’s election without traverse of Group III (claims 14-18) in the reply filed on 1/12/2026 is acknowledged. All other claims are withdrawn without traverse. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 14–18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over Parker (US 2024/0318933 A1) in view of Young (US 2023/0341208 A1) and further in view of Kras (US 2022/0049920 A1). Regarding claim 14, Parker discloses: a rifle barrel, comprising: a body having a first end and a second end (firearm barrel extending between chamber end and muzzle end; Parker ¶ [0061]); a bore extending through said body between the first end and the second end (barrel bore 37; Parker ¶ [0061]); a passage extending between the bore and the evacuation chamber (gas extraction port 131 extending from bore 37 and gas passage 134-1 conveying gas; Parker ¶ [0061]); Young discloses: an attachment defining an evacuation chamber (suppressor mount 110 attached to a barrel and first module defining expansion chamber 126; Young ¶¶ [0022], [0030]); Kras discloses: said evacuation chamber drawing gas out of said bore (suppressor chambers configured to reduce backflow and manage pressure by drawing gas from the barrel into the chamber; Kras ¶¶ [0028], [0030]–[0032], [0071]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Parker’s bore gas passage in combination with Young’s suppressor attachment defining an expansion chamber in order to draw gas from the bore into the attachment chamber for pressure management as taught by Kras. Regarding claim 15, Young discloses: a rifle barrel, comprising: a body having a first end and second end; said first end defining a chamber and said second end defining a muzzle (suppressor mount attachable at barrel muzzle; Young ¶¶ [0022], [0027]); said body having a larger diameter in at least one location which tapers to a smaller diameter defining a taper lock (tapered locking surface 117 and corresponding tapered engagement surfaces; Young ¶¶ [0028], [0031], [0036]); a threaded section spaced from said smaller diameter of said body (external threads 116 spaced from tapered locking surface 117; Young ¶ [0027]–[0028]); an attachment having a first attachment end and a second attachment end, wherein one end … engages said taper lock and the other … threadably engages said threaded section (modules connected via threads and taper lock engagement; Young ¶¶ [0028], [0031], [0036], [0043]); an evacuation chamber defined between said attachment and said body (expansion chamber 126 within suppressor attachment; Young ¶ [0030]); Parker discloses: a bore extending through said body from said first end to said second end (bore 37; Parker ¶ [0061]); a passage extending from the bore to an outer surface of said body (gas extraction port 131; Parker ¶ [0061]); Kras discloses: chamber structures managing gas flow and reducing backflow (Kras ¶¶ [0030]–[0032]). It would have been obvious to configure Parker’s gas passage to vent into Young’s expansion chamber to manage gas pressure and reduce backflow as taught by Kras. Regarding claim 16, Young and Parker disclose rifle barrel systems, and rifle barrels conventionally include rifling. Thus, said bore having rifling is an obvious feature of a rifle barrel. Regarding claim 17, Parker discloses: said passage being angled (gas extraction port 131 extending at an angle relative to the bore axis; Parker ¶ [0061]). Regarding claim 18, Parker discloses: gas extraction port 131 directing gas rearward toward the breech via gas tube 132 (Parker ¶ [0061]), thereby teaching said passage being angled toward said first end. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D DAVID whose telephone number is (571)270-3737 and whose email address is michael.david@uspto.gov*. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30am-5:00pm EST. *Communications via Internet e-mail are at the discretion of the applicant. Applicant is welcome to file an electronic communication authorization (sb439) form at any time if he/she would like to communicate via e-mail: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdfWithout a written authorization by applicant in place, the USPTO will not respond via Internet e-mail to any Internet correspondence which contains information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 122. A paper copy of such correspondence will be placed in the appropriate patent application. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Troy Chambers can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MICHAEL D DAVID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 14, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602519
SYSTEMS FOR AUTOMATED BLAST DESIGN PLANNING AND METHODS RELATED THERETO
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601560
BUFFER TUBE APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12584702
Grip Module for Handgun
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578157
AMMUNITION MAGAZINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571601
Charging Slide for Foldable Firearm
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
82%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+14.3%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 443 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