Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/290,701

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR LOW PRESSURE DIAMOND GROWTH WITHOUT PLASMA INCLUDING SEEDING GROWTH

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Apr 30, 2021
Examiner
GREGORIO, GUINEVER S
Art Unit
1732
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Max-Planck Institute For Polymer Research
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
600 granted / 825 resolved
+7.7% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
853
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
57.7%
+17.7% vs TC avg
§102
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
§112
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 825 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant states “Sung teaches that the diamond growth catalyst can be an alloy of a diamond catalyst and a rare earth element, and the diamond catalyst can generally include any conventional diamond growth catalyst such as, but not limited to, Fe, Co, Ni, Pd, alloys thereof, and combinations thereof. See Sung at paras. [0031] to [0032]. Sung does not teach or suggest the use of amorphous carbon film, graphene flakes, or graphite particles, as catalysts for enhancing the growth of diamonds. Therefore, Sung does not teach or suggest all of the elements of claim 44, and does not render claim 44 obvious. “ Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because Sung also teaches “particulate carbon source can also act as a diamond seed”. Sung teaches pure carbon sources such as graphite, diamond, diamondoid (e.g. adamantane), or nanodiamond can be particularly effective from a manufacturing efficiency standpoint. The current rejection is therefore maintained because Sung teaches material such as graphite and adamantane which would meet Applicant’s amendment. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 44-55 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sung (U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0228120). Regarding claim 44, Sung teaches method of growing a diamond mass in a liquid growth medium comprising liquid growth medium can include a carbon source, a diamond growth catalyst, and a dissociated hydrogen of a hydrogen source and operating at a temperature range of 600 ̊C to about 800 ̊C which meets a broad and reasonable interpretation of heating a composition comprising a source of reactive carbon to a temperature below 800 °C where diamond does not spontaneously convert to graphite (paragraphs 6 and 43). Sung teaches pressures less than 10 atm for low pressure diamond growth which meets a broad and reasonable interpretation of wherein the heating takes place at a pressure below 1 GPa where diamond is not the most stable form of carbon (paragraphs 39 and 40). Sung teaches molten liquid phase provides a diamond growth catalyst which allows the carbon to form diamond at the temperature and pressure conditions discussed which meets a broad and reasonable interpretation of wherein the composition comprises a catalyst that enhances a growth rate or a nucleation efficiency of the diamonds and responsive to the heating, growing diamonds from the composition (paragraph 6). Sung teaches particulate carbon source can also act as a diamond seed (paragraph 28). Sung teaches pure carbon sources such as graphite, diamond, diamondoid (e.g. adamantane), or nanodiamond can be particularly effective from a manufacturing efficiency standpoint which meets a broad and reasonable interpretation of amorphous carbon film, graphene flakes, or graphite particles, or any combination thereof. (paragraph 27). Regarding claim 45, Sung teaches carbon sources such as carbon source materials can include methane, acetylene, adamantane, graphite, diamond, diamondoid, nanodiamond, derivatives of these materials, or the like which meets a broad and reasonable interpretation of wherein the source of reactive carbon comprises an organic molecule that comprises carbon and hydrogen and that begins to decompose at a growth temperature of the diamonds (paragraph 27). Regarding claim 46, Sung teaches carbon sources such as carbon source materials can include methane, acetylene, adamantane, graphite, diamond, diamondoid, nanodiamond, derivatives of these materials, or the like which meets a broad and reasonable interpretation of wherein the source of reactive carbon comprises long- chain branched or unbranched alkanes or alkenes, waxes, light or heavy oils, polymers, paraffin, tetracosane, heptamethylnonane, or any combination thereof (paragraph 27). Regarding claim 47, Sung teaches diamond-like organic seed molecules and custom designed seed molecule engineered for growth of fluorescent nanodiamond which meets a broad and reasonable interpretation of wherein the composition comprises a seed crystal or a seed molecule that serves as a diamond growth template or as a precursor for a fluorescent color center, or any combination thereof (paragraph 5). Regarding claims 48-52, Sung teaches nanocrystals grown from optical fluorescence from diamonds grown with 1-adamantylamine seeds (paragraph 17). Regarding claims 53-55, Sung teaches halogenated organic compounds may be utilized to induce seeded growth at temperatures below that needed for radical creation (paragraph 42). Conclusion 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 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 GUINEVER S GREGORIO whose telephone number is (571)270-5827. The examiner can normally be reached M-W 11 am - 9 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, Coris Fung can be reached at 571-270-5713. 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. /GUINEVER S GREGORIO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1732 01/10/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 30, 2021
Application Filed
Aug 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 12, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590011
MIXED METAL DODECABORIDES AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590012
NEGATIVE THERMAL EXPANSION MATERIAL AND COMPOSITE MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12545589
CARBON-BASED POROUS MATERIAL AND PREPARATION METHOD AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12522502
BUNDLE-TYPE CARBON NANOTUBES AND METHOD FOR PREPARING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12509351
DISAGGREGATION OF NANODIAMOND PARTICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 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
73%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+18.5%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 825 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