Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 35/523,955

Airtight and watertight padding construction

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Feb 01, 2024
Examiner
ELOWSKY, EARL BENJAMIN
Art Unit
2934
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
Mayer Wiezman
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allow Rate
20 granted / 20 resolved
+40.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 9m
Avg Prosecution
1 currently pending
Career history
21
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
8.0%
-32.0% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
72.0%
+32.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 20 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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Israel on August 2, 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the IL71220 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. In the case of a design application, the certified copy must be filed during the pendency of the application, unless filed with a petition under 37 CFR 1.55(g) together with the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(g)(1), that includes a showing of good and sufficient cause for the delay in filing the certified copy of the foreign application. If the certified copy of the foreign application is filed after the date the issue fee is paid, the patent will not include the priority claim unless corrected by a certificate of correction under 35 U.S.C. 255 and 37 CFR 1.323. Objections to the Specification The specification is objected to as follows: The title “Airtight and Watertight Padding [construction]” is objectionable because it is not directed to an article of manufacture. Specifically, 35 U.S.C. 171 requires designs to be directed to “an article of manufacture” and “construction” is an uncountable noun that describes a method or a process and not an article of manufacture as required by 35 U.S.C. 171. Therefore, for accuracy, the title, and each occurrence of the language of the title, should be amended throughout the application, original oath or declaration excepted, to read similar to: --Airtight and Watertight Padding-- A substitute specification to the claim is required pursuant to 37 CFR 1.125 and must be submitted with markings showing all the changes relative to the immediate prior version of the specification of record. The text of any added subject matter must be shown by underlining the added text. The text of any deleted matter must be shown by strike-through except that double brackets placed before and after the deleted characters may be used to show deletion of five or fewer consecutive characters. The text of any deleted subject matter must be shown by being placed within double brackets if strike-through cannot be easily perceived. An accompanying clean version (without markings) and a statement that the substitute specification contains no new matter must also be supplied. Numbering the paragraphs of the specification of record is not considered a change that must be shown. Claim Refusal - 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) The claim is refused 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 the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The claim is indefinite and nonenabling because the claim is not consistently or clearly disclosed. Specifically: Due to the following inconsistencies, the disclosure does not provide certainty as to the scope of the claimed design without resorting to conjecture. Specifically: Figs. 1.1-1.2 and 1.4-1.7 show the top flat surface of the outer flange and the top, side, and bottom exterior edges as not claimed an in broken line. Fig. 1.3 shows the edge of the top surface, side edge, and the bottom portion between the exterior edge and groove as claimed and in solid line. Fig. 1.8 shows the exterior bottom edge and the portion between the bottom edge and the groove as not claimed and in broken line. Fig. 1.9 shows the exterior top and bottom edges and the bottom portion between the exterior edge and the groove as not claimed and in broken line. Fig. 1.10 shows the top and bottom surfaces, the exterior side, and the top and bottom exterior edge lines as claimed and in solid line. PNG media_image1.png 2134 2032 media_image1.png Greyscale Applicant may overcome this rejection by amending the drawings to clearly and consistently show the scope of the claimed design. When preparing new or replacement reproductions, be careful to avoid introducing new matter. New matter is prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f). Any amended replacement drawing sheet of the reproductions should include all of the views appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one view is being amended. The view of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended”. If a drawing view is to be canceled, the appropriate view must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining views 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 renumbered of the remaining views. Each drawing sheet of reproductions 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). Applicant is reminded that the numbering of the reproductions and legends must follow the Hague Administrative Instructions Section 405(a) consisting of two separate figures separated by a dot (e.g., 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc. for the first design, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, etc. for the second design, and so on) (see 37 CFR 1.1026 and MPEP 2909.02). 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. Conclusion The claim is refused under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) as set forth above. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additionally cited references show the state of the art. Applicant may view and obtain copies of the cited references by visiting http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html and pressing the “Number Search” button. 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 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. 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. When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence When responding to official correspondence issued by the USPTO, including a notification of refusal, please note the following: 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 Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only) https://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/efs-web- guidance-and- resources Mail: Commissioner For Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450 Facsimile to the USPTO's Official Fax Number (571-273-8300) Hand-carry to USPTO's Alexandria, Virginia Customer Service Window See https://www.uspto.gov/patents-maintaining-patent/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. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EARL B ELOWSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-1578. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 8:30am-5pm 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, Shawn Gingrich, can be reached at (571) 270-0218. 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. /E.B.E./Examiner, Art Unit 2934 /JONATHAN J HAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2926
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 01, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1120272
Perfume or essential oil-diffuser
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent D1105351
NOZZLE FOR FLUID PUMP
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1105389
AROMATHERAPY DIFFUSER
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1104213
SHOWER HEAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
Patent D1104204
HIGH PRESSURE GAS STORAGE UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
1y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 20 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