Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/209,496

LURE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
May 15, 2025
Examiner
TRUONG, KATELYN T
Art Unit
3647
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Shimano Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allow Rate
161 granted / 287 resolved
+4.1% vs TC avg
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+38.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
319
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
47.3%
+7.3% vs TC avg
§102
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
§112
27.9%
-12.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 287 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Application Status Claims 1-10 are pending and have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement As of the date of this action, an information disclosure statement (IDS) has been filed on 05/15/2025 and reviewed by the Examiner. Claim Objections Claim 5 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 5 appears to have an additional word “the a distance between”, this appears to be indicating –a distance between--. Appropriate correction is required. 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)(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. (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(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NPL “Making Topwater Popper Plug Fishing Lure. 3D Printed Fishing Lure Making.” By 3D Printed Angler, Youtube 2021. In regards to claim 1, 3DPrintedAngler anticipates a lure, comprising a body configured to have an internal space inside an outer shell (3DPrintedAngler; see model of half of the body of the lure below, with an internal space formed by the large openings and the smaller openings between grid-line walls, with an outer shell on the exterior), and the body has, in the internal space, an array structure in which grid lines are arranged in a generally uniform manner (3DPrintedAngler; see model of the cross section of the lure below, where the internal space has grid 1 formed by crossing internal walls, and grid 2 made by the 3D print’s infill). PNG media_image1.png 574 942 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 579 940 media_image2.png Greyscale In regards to claim 2, 3DPrintedAngler anticipates the lure according to claim 1, wherein the array structure has the grid lines arranged three-dimensionally (3DPrintedAngler; see FIGs of the 3D slicer settings which demonstrate the grid lines arranged 3 dimensionally). In regards to claim 3, 3DPrintedAngler anticipates the lure according to claim 1, wherein the array structure includes a first array structure having a first pitch (3DPrintedAngler; first array structure being grid 1 with a first pitch or distance between parallel walls), and a second array structure having a second pitch different from the first pitch (3DPrintedAngler; second array structure being grid 2 with a second pitch or distance between parallel walls being smaller than the pitch of grid 1). In regards to claim 4, 3DPrintedAngler anticipates the lure according to claim 3, wherein the first array structure (3DPrintedAngler; grid 1) and the second array structure (3DPrintedAngler; grid 2) are provided in the internal space in accordance with a buoyant force arrangement in the lure (3DPrintedAngler; see the FIG below where the first and second array structures are provided in the internal space within the outer shell, and would provide different buoyant forces based on their arrangements due to the infill of grid 2 being denser than in the area with grid 1). PNG media_image3.png 633 937 media_image3.png Greyscale In regards to claim 5, 3DPrintedAngler anticipates the lure according to claim 3, wherein the internal space includes a first space having inner walls (3DPrintedAngler; the first space being the space with grid 1, see the annotated FIGs above where grid 1 has inner walls), and a second space having inner walls (3DPrintedAngler; the second space being the space with grid 2, with inner walls created by the 3D Print’s infill), the a distance between the inner walls of the second space being greater than a distance between the inner walls of the first space (3DPrintedAngler; the distance between parallel inner walls of grid 2 being > than the distance between the parallel inner walls of grid 1, see the annotated FIG below), the second pitch is smaller than the first pitch (3DPrintedAngler; pitch of grid 2 being smaller than the pitch of grid 1 due to the infill of grid 2 being closer together than the spacing between the walls which make up grid 1), the first array structure is provided in the first space, and the second array structure is provided in the second space (3DPrintedAngler; the first space being the space with grid 1, the second space being the space with grid 2). PNG media_image4.png 633 937 media_image4.png Greyscale In regards to claim 6, 3DPrintedAngler anticipates the lure according to claim 1, wherein the outer shell and the array structure are integrally formed from resin or metal (3DPrintedAngler; the outer shell and array are integrally formed of PLA (polylactic acid) which is a type of resin). In regards to claim 7, 3DPrintedAngler anticipates the lure according to claim 1, wherein the body includes a first body having a first outer shell, and a second body having second outer shell joined to the first body, to form an internal space (3DPrintedAngler; the body includes two halves which are joined together to form an internal space; see video where two halves of the lure are printed and joined in the assembly process to form the internal space). In regards to claim 8, 3DPrintedAngler anticipates the lure according to claim 6, wherein the body is formed by a 3D printer (3DPrintedAngler; see video and FIG below where the lure is demonstrated as being formed by a 3D Printer) (Additional note; this is a product by process claim; where it is understood that 3D Printing is a process by which the product is made). Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 In regards to claim 9, 3DPrintedAngler anticipates the lure according to claim 1, further comprising a first eye configured to have a fishing line connected thereto, and a portion of the first eye embedded in the body (3DPrintedAngler; see the eyes embedded into the body below, the eyes configured to have a fishing line connected thereto). PNG media_image5.png 768 1388 media_image5.png Greyscale In regards to claim 10, 3DPrintedAngler anticipates the lure according to claim 1, further comprising a second eye configured to have a hook portion connected thereto, and a portion of the second eye embedded in the body (3DPrintedAngler; see any second one of the eyes in the FIG above being embedded in the body, the eyes being configured to have a fish hook connected thereto; additionally see FIG below with the hook explicitly connected thereto). PNG media_image6.png 773 1379 media_image6.png Greyscale Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. NPL “Creating Variable Infill within a Single Part using Cura” RIT AMPrint Center, Youtube Jan 31, 2023. Related by 3D Printing techniques. This video describes the process by which a single part can have multiple types of infill, or density and pattern of material within a particular area. RIT AMPrint Center describes the infill variation may be useful for different strengths and material properties throughout a particular device, and specifically demonstrates a singular part with multiple separate spaces with infills that are grid-shaped with different pitches. NPL “How we PRINTED our own Fishing Lures” Philosophy D, Youtube July 14, 2018. This video describes the process of 3D Printing a fishing lure and discusses infill densities and strength specifically with grid-patterned infill. NPL “Adjusting infill for 3D printed lure buoyancy?” Bambu Lab Unofficial User Group; Robert Sloan, Jan 2, 2024. This post discusses the concept of printing an area in a lure with more infill for buoyancy, where one area has a denser 100% infill on the belly with a 15% infill on the rest of the body to adjust for buoyancy. Marton Toth-Hollo explains how to modify the infill for the two separate parts. NPL “Variable Infill” by prntmker and JoanTabb on Prusa Research, December 14, 2020. Related by 3D Printing techniques. Discuss how to create variable infill density to provide for strength. Prntmker describes a part with 30% and 100% infill, and JoanTabb describes how to achieve this in pursa. NPL “Infill Techniques for Making More Efficient FDM Parts” by Forge Labs Engineering Team July 25, 2023. Related by 3D Printing techniques. Describes the advantages of and different infill structures providing for a balance of structural performance and economic considerations. They discuss the common infill patterns, demonstrating a grid structure, and the advantages of a grid infill when 3D Printing. They also discuss Variable Infill Density, describing that slicing software allows for different infill percentages within the same part, enabling optimization based on local stress requirements. US 20250042092 A1 to Bailey discusses 3D printing and teaches a system in which a device is printed with dynamic adjustment of 3D print infill specifications based on determined stress points given the 3D design. US 20220217958 A1, US 20190261614 A1 to Olsen teaches a lure with an interior hollow region with ribs which create a grid structure on the interior of the lure. US 20160157472 A1 to Neal teaches a lure with an interior grid structure. JP 2015213473 A to Kuzuya teaches a lure with an interior grid structure. US 20110010984 A1 to Reynolds teaches a lure with an internal lattice. US 6158161 A to Rossman, US 5349776 A to Lucas teaches a lure with a grid structure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATELYN T TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-0023. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8-6. 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, KIMBERLY BERONA can be reached at (571) 272-6909. 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. /KATELYN T TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 15, 2025
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599108
PET CAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599121
Fishing Line to Lure Connector
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593832
NUT, FISHING ROD REEL SEAT, AND FISHING ROD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12575550
Compact Fishing Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575516
IN-GROUND AEROPONIC PLANTER AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
56%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+38.2%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 287 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