Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/071,523

VENTURI EFFECT SCUPPER DRAIN

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Mar 05, 2025
Priority
Apr 23, 2021 — provisional 63/178,736 +1 more
Examiner
VENNE, DANIEL V
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Lifetime Products Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allowance Rate
1197 granted / 1681 resolved
+11.2% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1713
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
31.5%
-8.5% vs TC avg
§102
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
§112
44.7%
+4.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1681 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This application is a continuation of Application No. 17/657550, now US 12286197 B2. 3. Claims 1-14 are pending in the application. Drawings 4. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed features “structural elements” and “complementary structure” as recited must be shown (it is suggested with drawing reference characters corresponding to such features correlated to the written description of the Specification) or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The Specification does not make clear that which constitutes these features; in addition, the extent and location of such features are not clear in light of the Specification. No new matter should be entered. 5. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the above features as described in the Specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 6. 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. 7. In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application. Specification 8. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: No drawing reference characters are provided nor associated with the features identified in paragraphs 4 and 5 of this Office Action. Appropriate correction is required. The Specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The claimed feature limitation “structural elements” is not found in nor described in the Specification. Claimed features should be consistent with features found in and described in the Specification. In addition, terminology and/or nomenclature should be consistent throughout the disclosure, which includes the Abstract, Specification and Claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 10. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): 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. 11. Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention. 12. The claimed feature limitations “structural elements” and “complementary structure” as recited are not clear with respect to material and/or structure. The Specification does not make clear that which constitutes these features; in addition, the extent and location of such features are not clear in light of the Specification. Allowable Subject Matter As best understood by the examiner, claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action. As best understood by the examiner, claims 2-14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 15. The prior art cited and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The prior art reference of Jansen cited by the examiner discloses venturi tubes [12] on a boat. 16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL V VENNE whose telephone number is (571)272-7947. The examiner can normally be reached between M-F, 7am-3:30pm Flex. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Samuel J Morano can be reached on (571) 272-6684. 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). 17. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Daniel V Venne/ Senior Examiner, Art Unit 3617 10/07/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 05, 2025
Application Filed
Oct 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12767291
Lifeboat
3y 2m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12767305
OUTBOARD MOTOR
3y 1m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12767295
FAST LAUNCH AND RECOVERY SYSTEM FOR AUTONOMOUS UNDERWATER VEHICLE
2y 10m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12759689
DRIVE UNIT FOR JOINT PROPULSION AND MOTION CONTROL OF A MARINE VESSEL
2y 9m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12759676
PROCESS FOR MANUFACTURING A RIGID AQUATIC FLOATING OBJECT SUCH AS A SURFBOARD
3y 0m to grant Granted Oct 13, 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
71%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+15.4%)
2y 2m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1681 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