Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/495,581

METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR IMPROVING FABRIC BASED ENTRAPMENT OF AQUEOUS AEROSOL ASSOCIATED NANOPARTICLES

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Oct 06, 2021
Examiner
CHOI, PETER Y
Art Unit
1786
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Detrapel Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
20%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
5y 6m
To Grant
54%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 20% of cases
20%
Career Allow Rate
129 granted / 631 resolved
-44.6% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
5y 6m
Avg Prosecution
83 currently pending
Career history
714
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.6%
+13.6% vs TC avg
§102
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
§112
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 631 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 August 11, 2025, has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claim 44 is 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. Regarding claim 44, the claim recites that the binding agent comprises a substituted silane. Applicants’ specification as originally filed does not recite the limitation as claimed, including at paragraphs 0079-0080. Note that although paragraphs 0079-0080 recite binding agents being alkylalkoxysilanes, methyltrimethoxysilanes, and methyltriethoxysilanes, the recitation of “substituted silanes” is not recited nor does the recitation of the aforementioned binding agents encompass the broader genus of all “substituted silanes.” 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. Claims 13-18, 21, 22, 33-35, 38, 43, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPN 11,987,501 to Nguyen in view of WO 2005/068400 to Zhang and US Pub. No. 2017/0204279 to Larimer. Regarding claims 13-18, 21, 22, and 33-44, Nguyen teaches an aqueous hydrophobic silica dispersion including a hydrophilic particulate silica and a hydrophobic particulate silica (Nguyen, Abstract). Nguyen teaches that the hydrophobic particulate silica may include a hydrophobic treated fumed silica treated with a siloxane compound or alkyldialkoxysilane (Id., column 4 lines 29-39) and polydimethylsiloxane (Id., column 10 lines 36-63). Nguyen teaches that the dispersions can be used to prepare a treatment composition for a textile (Id., column 5 lines 46-52). Nguyen teaches that the coating layer can have a thickness from 2 microns to 20 mm (Id., column 17 lines 48-63). Nguyen teaches that the dispersions can coat textiles in the form of woven and non-woven fabrics, wherein the fibers comprise one or more of rayon, nylon, polyethylene, cellulose and others (Id., column 21 lines 42-64). Nguyen teaches that the coatings have water/humidity resistance, corrosion resistance, UV stability with no yellowing, high clarity, high abrasion and scratch resistance, stain and impact resistance, and low gloss (Id., column 19 lines 11-42). Regarding the hydrophobic coating being superhydrophobic, Nguyen teaches that the dispersions can coat textiles in the form of non-woven fabrics, wherein the fibers comprise one or more of rayon, nylon, polyethylene, cellulose and others. Additionally, Zhang teaches a similar hydrophobic coating composition comprising nanoparticles, microparticles and an organic solvent, whereby on application of the coating composition to a surface of a substrate and then curing, a hydrophobic coating having both microscale and nanoscale roughness is formed on the surface (Zhang, Abstract). Zhang teaches that the coating composition comprises a mixture of a sol solution prepared by the hydrolysis and condensation of a tri-functionalised alkylsilane, microparticles and an organic solvent (Id., page 10 lines 3-24, page 14 lines 5-21). Zhang teaches that the tri-functionalised alkylsilane may be copolymerized with a hydrophobic polymer, wherein the hydrophobic polymer may be a hydroxy-terminated polysiloxane such as polydimethylsiloxanes (Id., page 14 line 25 to page 15 line 17). Zhang teaches that the microparticles may be fumed silica (Id., page 15 line 25 to page 16 line 4). Zhang teaches a composition comprising methyltrimethoxysilane and polydimethylsiloxane, wherein the hydrophobicity of the nanoparticles together with the microscale and nanoscale roughness contributes to the hydrophobicity of the coating, forming superhydrophobic surfaces with contact angles greater than 130º (Id., page 17 line 1 to page 18 line 2) or greater than 165º (Id., page 18 line 8 to page 19 line 2). Zhang teaches applying the composition to a substrate by spraying (Id., page 19 lines 17-21). Zhang teaches that the coating composition can be used to render a surface water-resistant, and reduce or inhibit fouling of the surface by biological organisms, dirt, ice or chemicals (Id., page 21 lines 3-11) Additionally, Larimer teaches stretchable hydrophobic materials made with silica particles embedded into a liquid polymer (Larimer, Abstract). Larimer teaches articles coated with the hydrophobic material including personal protective equipment such as masks and gloves (Id., paragraphs 0008, 0087). Larimer teaches that liquid polymer may comprise polydimethylsiloxane, that the hydrophobic particles comprise silica particles having a hydrophobic shell, such as silica coated with hexamethyldisilazane or polydimethylsiloxane (Id., paragraphs 0010-0013). Larimer teaches that the compositions form a superhydrophobic and stretchable coating when applied to a substrate (Id., paragraph 0013), having a water contact angle greater than 150 degrees (Id., paragraphs 0041, 0051). Larimer teaches that substrates include textiles such as cotton or canvas fabric (Id., paragraphs 0061, 0106). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the hydrophobic coating of Nguyen, wherein the dispersion comprises a functionalized alkylsilane and hydrophobic polymer, such as methyltrimethoxysilane and polydimethylsiloxane, such that the coating is superhydrophobic, as taught by Zhang, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional hydrophobic coating having additional and predictably advantageous properties including rendering a surface water-resistant and reducing or inhibiting fouling of the surface by biological organisms, dirt, ice or chemicals, and as Larimer establishes that superhydrophobic materials were known in the art as being predictably suitable for use in masks and gloves. Regarding claims 33 and 44, the prior art combination teaches the inclusion of a polydimethylsiloxane, which appears to be within the scope of the claimed substituted silane binding agent. Regarding claim 43, Nguyen teaches that the coating composition may be applied by spraying (Nguyen, column 16 line 50 to column 17 line 5). Claims 19, 36, 37, and 39-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen in view of Zhang and Larimer, as applied to claims 13-18, 21, 22, 33-35, 38, 43, and 44 above, and further in view of US Pub. No. 2008/0264259 to Leung. Regarding claims 19, 36, 37, and 39-42, the prior art combination teaches use of the superhydrophobic coating on masks. Additionally, Leung teaches nanofiber filter facemasks, including a fine filter layer and a coarse filter layer, optional cover layers, and an optional hydrophobic coating (Leung, Abstract, paragraphs 0014, 0046). Leung teaches that the fibers include polyolefin, polyester, and cellulose ether and ester (Id., paragraph 0017). Leung teaches that the hydrophobic layer can be configured to allow free gas exchange while preventing water and other aqueous liquids from entering, in addition to prevent virus bearing water droplet from wetting and penetrating the cover (Id., paragraph 0049). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the coated mask of the prior art combination, wherein the mask is a multi-layered textile, such as the claimed mask structure, as taught by Leung, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional hydrophobic-coated textile comprising a mask structure known in the art as being predictably suitable for such applications. Regarding claims 39-42, the prior art combination suggests that the mask is configured to allow free gas exchange while preventing water and other aqueous liquids from entering, in addition to prevent virus bearing water droplet from wetting and penetrating the cover. Note that the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. Since the prior art combination teaches a substantially similar structure and composition as claimed, for use in the claimed manner with the claimed properties, it is reasonable for one of ordinary skill to expect that the mask may be configured as claimed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot based on the new grounds of rejection. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER Y CHOI whose telephone number is (571)272-6730. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571-272-7783. 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. /PETER Y CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 06, 2021
Application Filed
Oct 18, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
May 28, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 13, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Aug 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 13, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Sep 15, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 15, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590393
METHOD OF FORMING A WEB FROM FIBROUS MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588788
Wiping Product and Method For Making Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12569704
Water Resistant Protective Garment
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565719
CARBON FIBER AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12545785
ADDITION-CURABLE LIQUID SILICONE RUBBER COMPOSITION FOR AIRBAGS, AND AIRBAG
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
20%
Grant Probability
54%
With Interview (+33.8%)
5y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 631 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