Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 24, 2026
Application No. 18/947,308

Bathtub Drain Stopper

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 14, 2024
Priority
May 02, 2017 — CIP of 11/162,251 +1 more
Examiner
LOEPPKE, JANIE MEREDITH
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Pf Waterworks LP
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allowance Rate
630 granted / 1141 resolved
-14.8% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1166
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
49.6%
+9.6% vs TC avg
§102
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
§112
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1141 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of Species E is hereby acknowledged. Claims 3 and 8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/18/2026. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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(s) 1-2, 4-7, and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 6,067,669 (hereinafter Peterson) in view of US Patent 4,692,948 (hereinafter Martin). Regarding claim 1, Peterson discloses a drain stopper (10, fig. 2) for a bathtub or a sink having a drain opening and a drain pipe (12) having a drain flange (80) attached to the bathtub or the sink at the drain opening, wherein the drain pipe has crossbars (22) for anchoring the drain stopper, and wherein the crossbars have a central opening (20), the drain stopper (10) comprising: an open-close mechanism (60, 16, 50) having a longitudinal axis and upper (52, 68) and lower (18, bottom of 56) ends; a cap (60) engaged with the upper end (52, 68) of the open-close mechanism; a cap seal (74) engaged with the cap (via recess 70), wherein the cap seal is designed and configured to engage the drain pipe or the drain flange on the drain pipe for retaining water in the bathtub or in the sink (col. 2, ln. 37-40); and either a ball-and-spring detent mechanism attached to or formed integral with the lower end of the open-close mechanism, wherein the ball-and-spring detent mechanism is designed and configured to pass through the central opening in the crossbars and for the ball to move radially outwardly after passing through the central opening for engaging the drain stopper with the drain pipe (not explicitly disclosed); or Peterson fails to show the magnet as claimed. Attention is turned to Martin in the same field of endeavor of strainers equipped with stoppers for a drain assembly which teaches including a magnet at the lower end of an open close mechanism configured to engage an outlet plate through magnetic attraction to form a strong sealing action (col. 1, ln. 57-63). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Peterson to include a magnet with the lower end of the open-close mechanism to provide a strong sealing force between the stopper assembly and the sealing surface as evidenced by the teachings of Martin mentioned above. Regarding claim 2, Peterson shows further comprising a strainer (30) engaged directly or indirectly with the open close mechanism. Regarding claim 4, Peterson shows wherein the cap seal (74) has a hollow frustoconical shape with a smaller end (end that engages body portion containing threads 70) engaged with the cap and a relatively larger end (where the flange extends), wherein the larger end is designed and sized to press downwardly on the drain flange on the drain pipe while the open-close mechanism is in the closed position (col. 2, ln. 37-40) . Regarding claim 5, Peterson shows wherein the cap seal (74) is designed and configured to engage an inside wall of the drain pipe (note annotated fig. below).\ PNG media_image1.png 200 248 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claims 6 and 7, wherein the open-close mechanism is a push mechanism in which a first push downward on the cap moves the stopper from the open position to the closed position and a subsequent push downward on the cap moves the stopper from the closed position back to the open position or a lift-and-lock mechanism or a lift-and-turn mechanism (lift-and-lock mechanism; col. 2, ln. 40-49). Regarding claim 9, Peterson discloses a drain stopper (10, fig. 2) for a bathtub or a sink having a drain opening and a drain pipe (12) having a drain flange (80) attached to the bathtub or the sink at the drain opening, wherein the drain pipe has crossbars (22) or a rod for anchoring the drain stopper, the drain stopper (10) comprising: an open-close mechanism (60, 16, 50) having a longitudinal axis, upper (52, 68) and lower ends (18, bottom of 56), wherein the open-close mechanism is a push mechanism, a lift-and-lock mechanism or a lift-and- turn mechanism (lift-and-lock mechanism; col. 2, ln. 40-49); a cap (60) engaged with the upper end (52, 68) of the open-close mechanism; and a drain seal (74) engaged with the cap or the open-close mechanism (via recess 70), Peterson fails to show the lower end is designed and configured to engage the crossbar or the rod through magnetic attraction. Attention is turned to Martin in the same field of endeavor of strainers equipped with stoppers for a drain assembly which teaches including a magnet at the lower end of an open close mechanism configured to engage an outlet plate through magnetic attraction to form a strong sealing action (col. 1, ln. 57-63). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Peterson to include a magnet with the lower end of the open-close mechanism to provide a strong sealing force between the stopper assembly and the sealing surface as evidenced by the teachings of Martin mentioned above. Regarding claim 10, Martin shows wherein a magnet (54) is attached to or formed integral with the lower end of the open-close mechanism. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. WO 01/76432 A1 is directed to the state of the art of magnetically attached stopper assemblies. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANIE M LOEPPKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5208. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM ET. 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, David Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. 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. /JANIE M LOEPPKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 14, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 31, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12742321
WALL FLUSH VALVE
3y 0m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12735881
TOILET FLUSH CONTROLLER
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12729527
Pop Up Stopper and Seal
2y 7m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12692689
DRAINAGE CHANNEL AND USE OF A DRAINAGE CHANNEL IN A SANITARY FACILITY, IN PARTICULAR A SHOWER FACILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12690723
MODULAR SHOWER CADDY DEVICE
1y 9m to grant Granted Jul 28, 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
55%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+29.1%)
2y 7m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1141 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