Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/935,224

MASKLESS TOUCH UP TOOL FOR SURFACE COATINGS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 01, 2024
Examiner
VETERE, ROBERT A
Art Unit
1712
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
BLUE ORIGIN, LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allow Rate
530 granted / 872 resolved
-4.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
921
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
60.7%
+20.7% vs TC avg
§102
15.6%
-24.4% vs TC avg
§112
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 872 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-9, 11-17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Daly et al. (US 2018/0369860). Claim 1: Daly teaches a tool for painting (i.e. touching up) a surface (Abst.), the tool comprising: a faceplate (the face of 23 shown as hatched lines in Fig. 4) on the distal end of the tool (Figs. 1, 3) and having an opening that surrounds a target region of the substrate (Fig. 3; ¶¶ 0042-0043, 0047); and a plurality of sidewalls (the sloped portions of 23 in Fig. 3) extending away from the faceplate and forming a reservoir to receive excess paint (Fig. 3; ¶¶ 0042-0043, 0047). Claims 2-4: Daly teaches a handle (14) which is coupled to the sidewalls by two supports (13). Claim 5: Daly teaches that the tool comprises four lateral sidewalls (Fig. 2, e.g.). Claim 6: Daly teaches a runoff section (24) connected to the sidewalls (¶¶ 0043, 0047). Claim 7: Daly teaches that the faceplate and sidewalls are configured to detach from the distal end of the tool (¶ 0040). Claim 8: Daly teaches that the faceplate comprises a seal which creates a negative pressure (i.e. claimed seal) with the surface (¶ 0047). Claims 9 and 11: Daly teaches that the faceplate is flat like the surface and polygonal (Fig. 1, e.g.). Claim 12: Daly teaches a tool for painting (i.e. touching up) a surface (Abst.), the tool comprising: a distal end comprising a faceplate (the face of 23 shown as hatched lines in Fig. 4) (Figs. 1, 3 and 4); a proximal end having a handle (14); a plurality of sidewalls (the sloped portions of 23 in Fig. 3) coupled with the faceplate and handle (Fig. 1); and a runoff portion (24) where the runoff portion and sidewalls form a reservoir (Fig. 3; ¶ 0043). Claims 13-14: Daly teaches that the sidewalls and handle are coupled by two curved supports (13; Fig. 1). Claim 15: Daly teaches a container (18) coupled to the reservoir. Claim 16: Daly teaches that the runoff directs excess coating towards the centerline of the reservoir (Fig. 3; ¶ 0043). Claim 17: Daly teaches that the tool comprises four lateral sidewalls (Fig. 2, e.g.). Claim 19: Daly teaches that the faceplate comprises a seal which creates a negative pressure (i.e. claimed seal) with the surface (¶ 0047). Claim 20: Daly teaches that the faceplate is flat like the surface (Fig. 1, e.g.). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daly in light of Chase et al. (US 2017/0136491). Claim 10: Daly fails to teach how the faceplate is formed. Chase teaches a paint applicator tool (Abst.) and explains that the tool can be formed using injection molding or three dimensional printing (i.e. additive manufacturing) (¶ 0030). Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is prima facie obvious. MPEP § 2143. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to have formed the faceplate of Daly using additive manufacturing with the predictable expectation of success. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daly in light of Matsumoto et al. (US 2009/0266377). Claim 18: Daly fails to teach that the faceplate is removably coupled with the sidewalls. Matsumoto teaches an applicator for applying color to a surface (Abst.) and explains that the applicator includes a stencil faceplate with an opening corresponding to an shape or image (Abst.) which is removably attached to the distal end of the applicator (Fig. 3). Matsumoto teaches that using such a configuration allows for transfer of desired images to the surface (Abst.) and allows different images to be transferred using the same applicator (Fig. 7). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to have utilized a detachable stencil plate at the distal end of the applicator of Daly in order to have transferred images to the surface where desired with the predictable expectation of success. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert A Vetere whose telephone number is (571)270-1864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00 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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at (571) 270-1034. 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. /ROBERT A VETERE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 01, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600678
METHOD FOR CHARGING OPEN PORES IN CERAMIC MATRIX COMPOSITE, AND CERAMIC MATRIX COMPOSITE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604657
HIGH-THROUGHPUT EXPLORATION OF TRIPLE-CATION PEROVSKITES VIA TERNARY COMPOSITIONALLY-GRADED FILMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590181
HYDROPHOBICALLY-MODIFIED ASSOCIATIVE THICKENER POLYMERS PROCESS FOR THE PREPARATION AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590035
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING AN ABRADABLE LAYER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583793
CERAMIC SLATE WITH COLORED JADE EFFECT AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
61%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+13.4%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 872 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