Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/224,670

Cathodic Corrosion Protection with Current Limiter

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Apr 07, 2021
Examiner
KEELING, ALEXANDER W
Art Unit
1795
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Vector Remediation Ltd.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allow Rate
320 granted / 570 resolved
-8.9% vs TC avg
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+38.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
56 currently pending
Career history
626
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
53.2%
+13.2% vs TC avg
§102
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
§112
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 570 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/17/2025 has been entered. Status of Rejections All previous rejections are withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s amendments. New grounds of rejection are necessitated by the Applicant’s amendments. Claims 28-38 are pending and under consideration for this Office Action. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 28-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 28: The limitations claiming “providing a field effect transistor (FET) in the electrically conductive circuit which acts as a current regulating device… wherein there is provided a resistor connected between the first and second conductors so that the resistor provides a path in parallel with FET so that current passes through the resistor between the anode construction and the steel member” are considered new matter because the original disclosure only discusses this configuration when using a current regulating diode, not a FET (see [0014] and Fig 11 of the instant PGPub). Claim 33: The limitations claiming “providing for each anode construction a respective field effect transistor (FET)… wherein there is provided for each FET a resistor connected between the first and second conductors so that the resistor provides a path in parallel with FET so that current passes through the resistor between the anode construction and the DC power supply” are considered new matter because the original disclosure only discusses this configuration when using a current regulating diode, not a FET (see [0014] and Fig 11 of the instant PGPub). Claim 36: The limitations claiming “providing for each anode construction a respective field effect transistor (FET)… wherein there is provided for each FET a resistor connected between the first and second conductors so that the resistor provides a path in parallel with FET so that current passes through the resistor between the anode construction and the DC power supply” are considered new matter because the original disclosure only discusses this configuration when using a current regulating diode, not a FET (see [0014] and Fig 11 of the instant PGPub). Any claims dependent on the above claims are rejected for their dependence. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 28-38 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 28: There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the first…[conductor]" in the paragraph starting with “and wherein there is provided a path in parallel…”. Claim 28: There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation " the…second [conductor]" in the paragraph starting with “and wherein there is provided a path in parallel…”. Claim 33: There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the first…[conductor]" in the paragraph starting with “and wherein there is provided for each FET a resistor…”. Claim 33: There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation " the…second [conductor]" in the paragraph starting with “and wherein there is provided for each FET a resistor…”. Claim 36: There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the first…[conductor]" in the paragraph starting with “and wherein there is provided for each FET a resistor…”. Claim 36: There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation " the…second [conductor]" in the paragraph starting with “and wherein there is provided for each FET a resistor…”. Any claims dependent on the above claims are rejected for their dependence. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 10/17/2025 with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) under 35 USC 102 over Lambert (US 4713158) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Relevant Prior Art Mochizuki (JP2018123394A, Google Patents translation used for citation): The reference discloses a cathodic protection method (see e.g. abstract) comprising providing a plurality of anodes (see e.g. #20 on Fig 6), generating a voltage difference between the anodes and a steel member in concrete (see e.g. abstract), and providing a field effect transistor (FET) for each anode between the anodes and the steel member (see e.g. #36 on Fig 6). However, Mochizuki does not teach providing a resister having a path in parallel with the FET so that current passes through the resistor between the anode construction and the steel member. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER W KEELING whose telephone number is (571)272-9961. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM. 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, Luan Van can be reached at 571-272-8521. 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. /ALEXANDER W KEELING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 07, 2021
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Jul 26, 2023
Response Filed
Oct 11, 2023
Final Rejection — §102, §112
Mar 18, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 20, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 24, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Nov 27, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 13, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §112
Jul 17, 2025
Notice of Allowance
Oct 17, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12577689
CATHODE ELECTRODE, COMPOSITE OF CATHODE ELECTRODE AND SUBSTRATE, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING COMPOSITE OF CATHODE ELECTRODE AND SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577694
ALTERNATING CURRENT ELECTROLYSIS SYSTEM, AND METHOD AND DEVICE FOR CONTROLLING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571117
OPERATION SUPPORT METHOD, OPERATION SUPPORT DEVICE, OPERATION SUPPORT SYSTEM, AND OPERATION SUPPORT PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559849
WATER SPLITTING CATALYST
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12534812
CATHODIC PROTECTION OF CONCRETE USING AN ANODE ATTACHED TO AN OUTER SURFACE.
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
56%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+38.8%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 570 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