Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 17/559,381

ONE-COMPONENT VAPOR PERMEABLE AIR BARRIER COALESCABLE AT LOW TEMPERATURE

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Dec 22, 2021
Priority
Dec 22, 2020 — provisional 63/128,947
Examiner
EGWIM, KELECHI CHIDI
Art Unit
1762
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Tremco CPG Inc.
OA Round
4 (Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allowance Rate
557 granted / 797 resolved
+4.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
845
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
42.6%
+2.6% vs TC avg
§102
49.5%
+9.5% vs TC avg
§112
2.9%
-37.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 797 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/26/2025 has been entered. Election/Restrictions Claims 16-20 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 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. Claim(s) 1-5, 7-12, 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Wu et al. (CN 107001844). In the abstract, ¶ 76-78, and claims, Wu et al. teach a low VOC coating composition, comprising: an acrylic latex polymer with a glass transition temperature of 0 degrees centigrade to 60 degrees centigrade; 0.1-7% by weight of a glycol ether solvent such as dipropylene glycol methyl ether, propylene glycol n-butyl ether, dipropylene glycol n-butyl ether or diethylene glycol methyl ether (See ¶ 66); and 0.1 to 4.3% by weight of a silica. In ¶ 83, Wu et al. teach 0.001 wt % to 10 wt % of an additive such as humectants, biocides, plasticizers and adhesion promoters in the aqueous coating composition. In ¶ 69, Wu et al. also teach that the aqueous coating composition may further comprise one or more thickeners. While Wu et al. do not expressly teach each of the disclosed properties of the claimed coating composition, i.e. coalescence, water vapor permeance, etc., it is reasonable that the coating composition in Wu et al. would possess the presently claimed properties since the prior art coating compositions are essentially the same as the claimed composition and the USPTO does not have at its disposal the tools or facilities deemed necessary to make physical determinations of the sort. In any event, an otherwise old composition is not patentable regardless of any new or unexpected properties. In re Fitzgerald et al, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 2112 - § 2112.02. Even if assuming that the prior art references do not meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 102, it would still have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to arrive at the same inventive composition because the disclosure of the inventive subject matter appears within the generic disclosure of the prior art. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Due to amendments by applicant, the previous rejections of record have been overcome and are hereby withdrawn. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 KELECHI CHIDI EGWIM whose telephone number is (571)272-1099. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-7. 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, Robert Jones can be reached at (571) 270-7733. 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. /KELECHI C EGWIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1762 KCE
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 1 earlier event
Feb 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
May 20, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 26, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Nov 26, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 28, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Mar 03, 2026
Response Filed
May 28, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12679964
TETRAISOPENTYL ESTERS OF BUTANETETRACARBOXYLIC ACID, PRODUCTION THEREOF AND USE THEREOF AS PLASTICIZERS
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12649869
METHOD FOR PRODUCING A PRESSURE-SENSITIVE ADHESIVE BASED ON AN ALKOXYLATED, IN PARTICULAR ETHOXYLATED, SILANE-CONTAINING POLYMER, PRESSURE-SENSITIVE ADHESIVE PRODUCED ACCORDING TO THIS METHOD, AND USE THEREOF
4y 6m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12643989
ANTIMICROBIAL MEDICAL GLOVE
4y 5m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12630660
AQUEOUS DISPERSION OF POLYMER PARTICLES AND USES THEREOF AS AN ADHESIVE COMPOSITION
4y 2m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12617884
ORGANIC FINE PARTICLE
4y 1m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+13.9%)
3y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 797 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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