Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 19/089,821

BLADDER FOR AN ARTICLE OF FOOTWEAR

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 25, 2025
Priority
Mar 26, 2024 — provisional 63/569,787
Examiner
SENGUPTA, SONYA MAZUMDAR
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Nike Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 7m
Est. Remaining
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allowance Rate
495 granted / 721 resolved
-1.3% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
738
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
50.2%
+10.2% vs TC avg
§102
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
§112
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 721 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Panian (US 2021/0120915). Panian teaches a method comprising: coupling a first barrier layer to a second barrier layer at a peripheral seam (216) to define a chamber between the first barrier layer (210) and the second barrier layer (210), the chamber including an interior void (paragraph 0059); and positioning a knit infill material within the interior void of the chamber between the first barrier layer and the second barrier layer material (paragraph 0073; Figures 2A and 2B). Panian teaches that the textile material may be a four-way stretch fabric (i.e., a material that stretches crosswise and lengthwise), Euro-woven textile fabrics, and stretchable synthetic fabrics (paragraph 0073). It is inherent that the knit infill material including a first material comprising a fusible yarn and a second material. However, if it is not inherent, it would have been obvious that the material would be included according to one of ordinary skill in the art. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 21-30 are allowed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SONYA M SENGUPTA whose telephone number is (571)272-6019. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30am-5:00pm. 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, Philip Tucker can be reached at 571-272-1095. 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. /SONYA M SENGUPTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 25, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12742296
Laminated tufted good
1y 2m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12734784
LAMINATE, RELEASE AGENT COMPOSITION, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING PROCESSED SEMICONDUCTOR SUBSTRATE
2y 4m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12718716
RELEASE FILM AND HOLE INSPECTION METHOD USING THE SAME
1y 7m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12709045
DEVICE, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CURING A TUBE LINER
1y 4m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12697783
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING A STRIP OF COMPOSITE MATERIAL INTENDED TO FORM A TUBULAR STRUCTURE AND CORRESPONDING INSTALLATION
1y 9m to grant Granted Aug 04, 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
69%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+20.1%)
3y 1m (~1y 7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 721 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