Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 35/521,864

Diving apparatus

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jul 12, 2024
Examiner
MCLEMORE, GREGORY GERALD
Art Unit
2941
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
Sani-Kitchen Service B V
OA Round
2 (Final)
96%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 7m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 96% — above average
96%
Career Allow Rate
133 granted / 138 resolved
+36.4% vs TC avg
Minimal -2% lift
Without
With
+-2.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 7m
Avg Prosecution
2 currently pending
Career history
140
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§102
40.5%
+0.5% vs TC avg
§112
54.9%
+14.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 138 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Examiner’s Comment 1. Applicant’s response filed on 09/05/2025 is acknowledged. The Objection to the Specification from 05/05/2025 has been overcome by correcting the figure descriptions so that they accurately describe the views. The Non-Final Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) has been overcome. The replacement drawings filed on 09/05/2025 do not overcome the Non- Final Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) and (b). Final Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) and (b) 2. The claim is finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b), 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 applicant regards as the invention. 3. It is acknowledged that the applicant has corrected Figure 1.8 to show the inflatable lung element and removed the additional element that was not shown in the other figures, however the replacement drawings filed on 09/05/2025 are indefinite and non-enabling because there are still inconsistencies in the drawings. Specifically, Figures 1.2 and 1.7 do not show the inflatable lung element, however, Figures 1.1, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.8 (from 09/05/2025) 1.9, and 1.10 show the inflatable lung element. See annotated imaged below: PNG media_image1.png 685 391 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 951 987 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 1004 947 media_image3.png Greyscale 4. Without a consistent and clear disclosure, the exact appearance of the claimed design cannot be understood. In the attempt to overcome this rejection, all the elements and details of the claimed design must be shown consistently throughout all the views. 5. If new drawings are prepared as a response to this rejection, care must be exercised to avoid introduction of anything which could be construed to be new matter prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f). 6. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as amended. If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. If all the figures on a drawing sheet are canceled, a replacement sheet is not required. A marked-up copy of the drawing sheet (labeled as "Annotated Sheet") including an annotation showing that all the figures on that drawing sheet have been canceled must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change to the drawings. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either "Replacement Sheet" or "New Sheet" pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d) . If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. 7. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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. Reply Reminder Applicant is reminded that any reply to this communication must be signed either by a patent practitioner (i.e., a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office) or by the applicant. If the applicant is a juristic entity, the reply must be signed by a patent practitioner. See 37 CFR 1.33(b). Discussion of the Merits of the Application All discussions between the applicant and the examiner regarding the merits of a pending application will be considered an interview and are to be made of record. See MPEP 713. The examiner will not discuss the merits of the application with applicant’s representative if the representative is not registered to practice before the USPTO. Appointment as applicant’s representative before the International Bureau pursuant to Rule 3 of the Common Regulations under the Hague Agreement does NOT entitle such representative to represent the applicant before the USPTO. Furthermore, an applicant that is a juristic entity must be represented by a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO. Additional information regarding interviews is set forth below. Telephonic or in person interviews A telephonic or in person interview may only be conducted with an attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO (“registered practitioner”) or with a pro se applicant (an applicant who is the inventor and who is not represented by a registered practitioner). The registered practitioner may either be of record or not of record. To become “of record”, a power of attorney (POA) in accordance with 37 CFR 1.32 must be filed in the application. Form PTO/AIA /80 “Power of Attorney to Prosecute Applications Before the USPTO”, available at https://www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms-patent-applications-filed-or-after-september-16-2012, may be used for this purpose. See MPEP 402.02(a) for further information. Interviews may also be conducted with a registered practitioner not of record provided the registered practitioner can show authorization to conduct an interview by completing, signing and filing an “Applicant Initiated Interview Request Form” (PTOL-413A) (available at the USPTO web page indicated above). See MPEP 405. For acceptable ways to submit forms to the USPTO, see “When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence” below. If a pro se applicant or registered practitioner located outside of the United States wishes to communicate by telephone, it is suggested that such person email the examiner at: [examiner email] to arrange a time and date for the telephone interview. Please include proposed days and times for the proposed call. When proposing a day/time for the interview, please take into account the examiner’s work schedule indicated in the last paragraph of this communication. The email should also be used to determine who will initiate the telephone call. Email Communications The merits of the application will not be discussed via email (or other electronic medium) unless appropriate authorization for internet communication is filed in the application. Form PTO/SB/439 “Authorization for Internet Communications in a Patent Application or Request to Withdraw Authorization for Internet Communications” may be used to provide such authorization and is available at the USPTO web page indicated above. The authorization may not be sent by email to the USPTO. For acceptable ways to submit the authorization form to the USPTO, see “When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence” below. See MPEP 502.03 II for further information. Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence The USPTO transacts business in writing. All replies must be signed in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33(b). Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.33(b)(3), a reply submitted on behalf of a juristic applicant must be signed by an attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO. Applicants may submit replies to Office actions only by: • Online via the USPTO's Patent Center: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov • Mail: Commissioner For Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450 Mailing should be done sufficiently in advance to ensure the USPTO receipt prior to reply period expiration • Facsimile to the USPTO's Official Fax Number (571-273-8300) (Do Not Fax Formal Drawings) • Hand-carry to USPTO's Alexandria, Virginia Customer Service Window For additional information regarding responding to office actions see: https://www.uspto.gov/patents/maintain/responding-office-actions Note that correspondence received will appear in the Patent Center, which may be viewed by the applicant at: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov 8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY G MCLEMORE whose telephone number is (571)272-1622. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am- 5:00pm ET. 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, George Ulsh, can be reached on (571)270-1433. 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. /G.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2925 /GEORGE J ULSH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2925
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 12, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jul 21, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 21, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 05, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 01, 2025
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1117584
Recreational water device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent D1105275
Toy Flower Making Set
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1104160
Children's Vehicle
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
Patent D1103292
Folding Wagon
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent D1103321
Tent without supporting rods
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
96%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (-2.2%)
1y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 138 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