Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/450,974

APPARATUS FOR PRODUCING RECONFIGURABLE WALLS OF WATER

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jan 16, 2026
Priority
Nov 13, 2023 — provisional 63/548,336 +1 more
Examiner
KIM, CHRISTOPHER S
Art Unit
3752
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Technifex Products LLC
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 7m
Est. Remaining
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allowance Rate
724 granted / 1143 resolved
-6.7% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
61 currently pending
Career history
1196
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§102
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§112
40.8%
+0.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1143 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Response to Amendment The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 16-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 16 recites the limitation “each of N” in line 18. It is uncertain whether “N” refers to the “N” recited in line 12 or a different undefined number. Claim 16 recites the limitation “the array is configured to selectively switch pressurized water to one or more of the water inlets” in lines 21-22. The claim fails to recite structure to accomplish the function. The structure recited in the claim is not commensurate in scope with the function recited in the claim. The term “adjacent” in claim 21 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “adjacent” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “adjacent” is defined as: near. The term “near” is also a relative term. The distance/location limited by the claim is uncertain. The term “adjacent” in claim 22 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “adjacent” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “adjacent” is defined as: near. The term “near” is also a relative term. The distance/location limited by the claim is uncertain. Claim 21 recites the limitation “an angle-specific 3D-printing process” in line 5. The preamble of the claim is directed to a method for building a horizontal array. It is uncertain whether claim 21 is directed to an angle-specific 3D-printing process or a method for building a horizontal array. Additionally, claim 21 fails to provide any angle-specific 3D-printing process steps. Claim 22 recites the limitation “an injection molding process” in line 5. The preamble of the claim is directed to a method for building a horizontal array. It is uncertain whether claim 22 is directed to an injection molding process or a method for building a horizontal array. Additionally, claim 22 fails to provide any injection molding process steps. Claim 23 recites the limitation “each of N” in line 4. It is uncertain whether “N” refers to the “N” recited in claim 16, line 12, in claim 16, line 18 or a different undefined number. Claim 32 recites the limitation “an injection molding” in line 5. The preamble of the claim is directed to a method for building a horizontal array. It is uncertain whether claim 32 is directed to an injection molding process or a method for building a horizontal array. Additionally, claim 32 fails to provide any injection molding process steps. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed September 11, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that the claims have been amended to more particularly point out and distinctly claim the invention. The claims remain indefinite for the reasons set forth above. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER S KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-4905. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30. 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, Arthur O Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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. /CHRISTOPHER S KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 CHRISTOPHER S. KIM Examiner Art Unit 3752 CK
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 16, 2026
Application Filed
May 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Aug 13, 2026
Interview Requested
Aug 24, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 24, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 11, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 30, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Oct 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12752138
SCREENING MACHINE FOR SCREENING SOLID MATERIAL
2y 10m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12746423
NOZZLE PLUGS FOR A DELUGE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM
3y 7m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12729524
HANDSHOWER AND DOCKING SYSTEM
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12703558
DISPENSING SYSTEMS
4y 1m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12691316
MONITORING AND EXTINGUISHING DEVICE
3y 2m 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+21.6%)
3y 5m (~2y 7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1143 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