Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 19/182,179

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR REDUCING DRAG ON THE HULL OF A VESSEL

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 17, 2025
Examiner
WIEST, ANTHONY D
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
635 granted / 896 resolved
+18.9% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+34.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
925
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
44.4%
+4.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
§112
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 896 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 . Claims 1-20 are pending in the current application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claims 1, 2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bekker, US 7641526. Bekker discloses a method of reducing drag on a hull (9) of a vessel comprising: providing at least one habitat (23a, 23b) on the hull (9) of the vessel at least partially below a waterline of the vessel, the at least one habitat having an open end (see Fig. 2A, 2B), positioning at least one jet nozzle (42a, 42b) within the at least one habitat; and jetting a fluid from the at least one nozzle onto the hull or a surface continuous with the hull so as to create a Coanda flow (see Claim 1) on the hull of the vessel, the Coanda flow extending outwardly of the open end of the habitat. The examiner considers the habitat of Bekker to be generally horizontal. Claims 1-3, 7, 10, 11, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Railey et al., US 11535353. Railey discloses a method of reducing drag on a hull (890) of a vessel comprising: providing at least one habitat (800) arranged generally horizontal on the hull (890) of the vessel at least partially below a waterline of the vessel, the at least one habitat having an open end (see Fig. 9), positioning at least one jet nozzle (812) within the at least one habitat; and jetting a fluid (water) from the at least one nozzle onto the hull or a surface continuous with the hull so as to create a Coanda flow (Column 12, lines 33-35) on the hull of the vessel, the Coanda flow extending outwardly of the open end of the habitat. Railey further discloses introducing air (bubbles) to a point below the waterline of the vessel (See claims 21 and 22 and Column 12, lines 33-36). Regarding claim 10: Railey further discloses wherein the at least one habitat is generally vertically-oriented such that the open end is a bottom end (exhaust port 812, Fig. 1A), the at least one habitat comprising: a closed top end (top end opposite exhaust port 812, at ports 891 on a left end in Fig. 1A); a face opposite the hull (cover 821, Fig. 1A); and opposing sides (opposing sides at upper and lower sides of exhaust port 812, on a right side of cover 821, wherein the lower side extends in the same plane as securement plate 890 in Fig. 1A), wherein a front side of the opposing sides (lower side of exhaust port 812, Fig. 1A) extends deeper than a rear side of the opposing sides (rear side at the upper side of exhaust port 812 in Fig. 1A; see Fig 1A showing the lower side of exhaust port 812 extending deeper than the upper side of exhaust port 812 when housing 820 is installed in kayak 883 via securement plate 890). 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. Claims 5, 6, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Railey. Railey discloses the invention set forth above, but does not disclose the precise angle that the jetted fluid impacts the hull or wherein the one nozzle is two or more nozzles with merging Coanda flows. Railey does disclose an oval-shaped end (815) into which the nozzle exhausts. The angle of impingement of the jetted fluid would fall into the range of angles specified in claims 5 and 6. Adding a second nozzle is just a mere duplication of parts easily achieved by an artisan for use on larger vessels. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the arrangement of Railey to include the jetted fluid contact the hull or a surface continuous with the hull at an angle between .001 and 90 degrees and more preferably approximately 2.5 degrees and to provide two or more nozzles. Doing so allows thrust from the nozzle to be guided along the hull increasing the efficiency of the pump system and adding two or more nozzles would increase the overall thrust. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 16-20 are allowed. Claims 4, 8, 12 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D WIEST whose telephone number is (571)270-5974. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00 - 3:00. 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. 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. /ANTHONY D WIEST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 17, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595025
STEP APPARATUSES FOR BOATS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589836
SURGE DAMPING SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES FOR USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12577942
METHODS OF SECURING A VESSEL DURING TRANSPORTATION, OFF-LOADING, AND INSTALLATION OF WIND TURBINE COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571372
FLOATING WIND TURBINE SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565296
RAPID REPLACEMENT CONTROL FIN FOR AN UNDERWATER VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
71%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+34.7%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 896 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month