Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 35/002,262

Hardpack snow ski cover

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jun 03, 2022
Examiner
DAVIS, MELVIN L
Art Unit
2942
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
Odr LLC
OA Round
3 (Final)
93%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
1y 9m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 93% — above average
93%
Career Allow Rate
338 granted / 364 resolved
+32.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-0.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 9m
Avg Prosecution
1 currently pending
Career history
365
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§102
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
§112
72.6%
+32.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 364 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . General Information The merits of this case have been carefully reexamined in light of the response received March 31, 2025. Following the amendments, the objections to the drawing and specification are withdrawn. However, portions of the rejection under 35 USC 112 (a) and (b) has not been fully overcome by the amendment and additional nonenablement issues arise from the amended. The following rejection under 35 USC 112 (a) and (b) is necessitated by applicant’s amendment and is made FINAL. Objection Specification Description of the Reproductions Due to alterations in the content of the application the specification now does not accurately describe the applications contents. The canceled descriptions of 1.2 and 1.7-1.8 in the amendment of 3/26/2024 must be readded to accurately describe the views. Accurate descriptions of all the reproductions must be provided. Broken Line Statement The title in the description does not reflect the amended title. The description must be amended accordingly. Claim Rejection - 35 USC 112(a) and (b) The claim is finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first and second paragraphs, as the claimed invention is not described in such full, clear, concise and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use the same, and fails 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. Scope Applicant states “the same design in Reproductions 1.5 & 1.6, just in different conditions of use”, however, the shape of the front of the covers are not the same, they’re appear to be mirror images of each other. The amended title makes it clear that there are parts to the article, which provides clarity to the inclusion of the bridge-like portion seen in 1.4, however, it does not clarify if the claim is for a set or pair of ski covers as shown in 1.1-1.3. Subsequently, making the scope unclear. See annotated drawing below. PNG media_image1.png 622 353 media_image1.png Greyscale Inconsistencies The claimed design is shown inconsistently between views. The exact appearance and configuration of portions of the design cannot be determined thus the claimed design is subject to multiple interpretations and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to reproduce the design without the use of conjecture. This renders the claim non-enabling. See the annotated illustrations below for an example if the inconsistent views. The under-hood portion of the cover is shown inconsistently between broken line and solid line throughout ALL the Reproductions. Applicant should review all views to ensure this portion of the article is shown consistently. See annotated drawing below for select examples. PNG media_image2.png 948 1168 media_image2.png Greyscale In Reproductions 1.1 the rear platform is shown recessed, in 1.3 and 1.8 its shown flush. See annotated drawing below. PNG media_image3.png 633 692 media_image3.png Greyscale The horizontal line shown in Reproductions 1.4 is absent in all other reproductions. See annotated drawing below for affected element. PNG media_image4.png 318 537 media_image4.png Greyscale In order to overcome this rejection, applicant may amend the claim so that the description of the claim is in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable a person skilled in the art to make and use the same, and particularly points out and distinctly claims the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention. Applicant should make all drawing consistent throughout the disclosure. When preparing new or replacement drawings, applicants are advised to take care to avoid introducing new matter. New matter is prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f). Similarly, in amending the claim, applicants are advised to comply with the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a), and make sure the amendment is supported by the original disclosure. Conclusion The claim is FINALLY REJECTED under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) and (b). 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). 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 extension fee 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 Melvin Davis whose telephone number is 571-272-6451. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon – Fri 11:00- 7:00 EST. If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, Michael Stout can be reached at (408) 918-7558. 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. 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. /MELVIN L DAVIS/ Design Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2924 /Richard Kearney/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2938
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 03, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 06, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jul 11, 2024
Response Filed
Nov 14, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 25, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 25, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 31, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 13, 2025
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1117560
Toy
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent D1105292
Toy
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1105327
INFLATABLE LOUNGE CHAIR
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1105293
Lobster Toy
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1103294
Toy Piece
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
93%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (-0.6%)
1y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 364 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