Office Action Predictor
Application No. 17/603,101

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR THE FILTRATION AND STABILIZATION OF ULTRA-HIGH GRAVITY ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 12, 2021
Examiner
LEBLANC, KATHERINE DEGUIRE
Art Unit
1791
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Porifera, INC.
OA Round
4 (Final)
34%
Grant Probability
At Risk
5-6
OA Rounds
4y 0m
To Grant
58%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

34%
Career Allow Rate
199 granted / 594 resolved
Without
With
+24.5%
Interview Lift
avg trend
4y 0m
Avg Prosecution
52 pending
646
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
57.0%
+17.0% vs TC avg
§102
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
§112
28.0%
-12.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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) 1-3,9,10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen(US 2010/0009031A1) in view of Coors(WO 2018/200538A1). As per claim 1, Nguyen discloses a method for filtering and stabilizing an alcoholic beverage(beer(alcoholic beverage) is stabilized through a cooling step and a filtration step; paragraphs[0030],[0034]), comprising: introducing the alcoholic beverage into a chilled holding tank set at a temperature within a range of -1 degrees C to-7 degrees C(matured beer from a fermentation reactor that holds 950 liters of water is chilled to minus 1 degree C(set temperature), either in that fermenter tank or a separate holding tank ;paragraphs[0084],[0093],[0095]); holding the alcoholic beverage in the chilled holding tank for a predetermined amount of time such that the temperature of the alcoholic beverage is within the range of-1 degrees C to-7 degrees C, (particular example, batch 2, is held for 1 day at minus 1 degree C; paragraphs[0093],{0095]) and; pumping the alcoholic beverage from the chilled holding tank through a filtration system (after holding at the chilled condition the beer is filtered using a plate filter with a coarse-and fine-grade pre-coat, followed by another filter for bottling, where a plate filter, or kieselguhr filter, and bottling are generally understood to require pressurization, usually by pumping; paragraphs[0084],[0093]); and collecting the alcoholic beverage filtered by the filtration system(the filtered beer was bottled; paragraphs[0084),[0094}). Nguyen does not disclose an ultra-high gravity (UHG) alcoholic beverage and wherein the temperature of the UHG alcoholic beverage is prevented from falling below a freezing point of the UHG alcoholic beverage. However, Coors discloses an ultra-high gravity alcoholic beverage (a beer extract has an alcohol by volume, or ABV, content of 24 to 33 percent (an ultra-high gravity, or UHG, alcoholic beverage); paragraph [0012)); receiving the UHG alcoholic beverage from a forward osmosis (FO) system (a standard high gravity beer is introduced to a forward osmosis, or FO, system to pull water from the beer and increase the alcohol content above 24 percent ABV; paragraph (0012]); wherein the temperature of the UHG alcoholic beverage is prevented from falling below a freezing point of the UHG alcoholic beverage (24 to 33 percent ABV beer is maintained between -1 and 20 degrees Celsius (where ethanol at 20 percent ABV freezes at -9 degrees C, freezing is prevented); paragraph [0012], [0015]-[00161). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have modified the method as previously disclosed by Nguyen, in order to have provided an ultra-high gravity alcoholic beverage; receiving the UHG alcoholic beverage from a forward osmosis system; wherein the temperature of the UHG alcoholic beverage is prevented from falling below a freezing point of the UHG alcoholic beverage, as previously disclosed by Coors, for providing a method to produce a beverage with reduced water content that reduces storage and transportation costs without noticeable loss in taste and aroma (Coors; paragraphs [0003], [0011)). Nguyen does not disclose processing a high gravity (HG) alcoholic beverage having 5% to 14% ABV via reverse osmosis to form a very-high gravity (VHG) alcoholic beverage having a greater alcohol by volume percentage (ABV) than the HG alcoholic beverage; processing the VHG alcoholic beverage and a draw solution via forward osmosis to form the UHG alcoholic beverage having a greater ABV and, via forward osmosis, output the UHG alcoholic beverage and spent draw solution. Coors discloses wherein the FO system comprises: a reverse osmosis (RO) subcomponent to receive a high gravity alcoholic beverage and output a very-high gravity alcoholic beverage having a greater alcohol by volume percentage than the high gravity alcoholic beverage (a high gravity beer introduced to a forward osmosis system becomes concentrated as water is drawn out into an ethanol/glycerol/water draw solution where the diluted draw solution (a high gravity alcoholic beverage) is returned to its original strength (very-high gravity alcoholic beverage) by passing through a reverse osmosis, or RO, system; paragraphs [0012)-(0013], [00171); and an FO subcomponent to receive as an input, the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage and a draw solution (the forward osmosis system (FO) includes a membrane separation zone where the draw side of the membrane receives the full strength ethanol/glycerol/water draw solution as input (very-high density alcoholic beverage and draw solution); paragraphs [0012]-[0013]), and, via forward osmosis, output the UHG alcoholic beverage having a greater alcohol by volume percentage than the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage and spent draw solution (after being dewatered, the beer can be up to 33 percent ABV (UHG alcoholic beverage output alcohol by volume), and the draw solution can range from 28 to 38 percent ABV, which will be at the 28 percent low end of the range when it is spent (UHG output at higher ABV than very-high gravity beverage and spent draw solution); paragraphs (0012)-[0013], [00171). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have modified the method as previously disclosed by Nguyen, in order to have provided wherein producing the UHG alcoholic beverage via the FO system comprises: processing, via reverse osmosis (RO) a high gravity alcoholic beverage to produce a very-high gravity alcoholic beverage, wherein the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage comprises a greater alcohol by volume percentage than the high gravity alcoholic beverage; and processing, via FO, the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage processed via RO, to produce the UHG alcoholic beverage, wherein the UHG alcoholic beverage comprises a greater ABV percentage than the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage, as previously disclosed by Coors, for providing a method to produce a beverage with reduced water content that reduces storage and transportation costs without noticeable loss in taste and aroma (Coors; paragraphs (0003], (00111). It would have been obvious to adjust the beginning and ending ABV of the ultra high gravity beverage depending on the alcohol content desired in the final product, as Nyugen teaches beers of all alcohol contents[0053]. As per claim 2, Nguyen and Coors, in combination, disclose the method of claim1, and Nguyen further discloses wherein the predetermined amount of time is between 20 minutes and 24 hours(a particular example, batch 2, is held for 1 day(24hours) at minus1 degree C; paragraphs[0093],[0095)). As per claim 3, Nguyen teaches that the beer includes beers with all possible alcohol contents; paragraph[0053]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to use beers with any alcohol content such as between 41% and 50%. As per claim 10, Nguyen discloses a method for filtering and stabilizing alcoholic beverages (beer(alcoholic beverages) is stabilized through a cooling step and a filtration step; paragraphs[0030],[0034]), comprising: conveying an alcoholic beverage into a chilled holding tank set at a temperature within a range of -1degrees C to-7 degrees C (matured beer from a fermentation reactor that holds 950 liters of water is chilled to minus 1 degree C(set temperature), either in that fermenter tank or a separate holding tank; paragraphs[0084], {0093],[0095]); maintaining the alcoholic beverage in the chilled holding tank for a holding time set between 20 minutes and 24 hours such that the temperature of the alcoholic beverage is within the range of -1 degree C to-7 degrees C(a particular example, batch2,is held for 1 day at minus 1 degree C; paragraphs(0093),[0095}); pumping, after expiration of the holding time, the alcoholic beverage from the chilled holding tank through a multi-stage filtration system comprising filters arranged in an order progressing from coarse particle size filtration elements to fine particle size filtration elements (after holding at the chilled condition for the 1 day time period, the beer is filtered using a plate filter with a coarse-and fine-grade pre-coat, followed by another filter for bottling (multi-stage filtration system arranged from coarse to fine filter elements), where a plate filter, or kieselguhr filter, and bottling are generally understood to require pressurization, usually by pumping; paragraphs[0084],[0093]), wherein the alcoholic beverage contains haze compounds prior to entering the filtration system, and wherein filtration system removes the haze compounds from the alcoholic beverage (final beer (alcoholic beverage) stabilization and filtration steps allow polyphenol-protein aggregates(haze compounds) to form, and the following filtration steps remove the precipitate polyphenols and haze active proteins from the beer; paragraph(0024)); and collecting, via a storage tank, the alcoholic beverage pumped through the multi-stage filtration system(the produced, pumped and filtered beer is packaged, including in a bulk-tank(storage tank);paragraph[0075]). Nguyen does not disclose an ultra-high gravity (UHG) alcoholic beverage; wherein the UHG alcoholic beverage is between 24 percent and 50 percent alcohol by volume; wherein the temperature of the UHG alcoholic beverage is prevented from falling below a freezing point of the beverage. However, Coors discloses an ultra-high gravity (UHG) alcoholic beverage (a beer extract has an alcohol by volume, or ABV, content of 24 to 33 percent (an ultra-high gravity, or UHG, alcoholic beverage); paragraph (0012]); receiving the UHG alcoholic beverage from a forward osmosis system; wherein the UHG alcoholic beverage is produced by the FO system and is between 24 percent and 50 percent alcohol by volume (a standard high gravity beer is introduced to a forward osmosis, or FO, system to pull water from the beer and increase the alcohol content from 24 to 33 percent ABV; paragraph (0012]); wherein the temperature of the UHG alcoholic beverage is prevented from falling below a freezing point of the beverage (24 to 33 percent ABV beer is maintained between -1 and 20 degrees Celsius (where ethanol at 20 percent ABV freezes at -9 degrees C, freezing is prevented); paragraph (0012), [0015]-[00161). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have modified the method as previously disclosed by Nguyen, in order to have provided an ultra-high gravity (UHG) alcoholic beverage; receiving the UHG alcoholic beverage from a forward osmosis system; wherein the UHG alcoholic beverage is produced by the FO system and is between 24 percent and 50 percent alcohol by volume; wherein the temperature of the UHG alcoholic beverage is prevented from falling below a freezing point of the beverage, as previously disclosed by Coors, for providing a method to produce a beverage with reduced water content that reduces storage and transportation costs without noticeable loss in taste and aroma (Coors; paragraphs [0003], [00111). Nguyen does not disclose wherein producing the UHG alcoholic beverage via the FO system comprises: processing, via reverse osmosis (RO), a high gravity alcoholic beverage to produce a very-high gravity alcoholic beverage, wherein the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage comprises a greater alcohol by volume percentage than the high gravity alcoholic beverage; and processing, via FO, the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage processed via RO, to produce the UHG alcoholic beverage, wherein the UHG alcoholic beverage comprises a greater ABV percentage than the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage. However, Coors discloses wherein producing the UHG alcoholic beverage via the FO system comprises: processing, via reverse osmosis (RO), a high gravity alcoholic beverage to produce a very-high gravity alcoholic beverage, wherein the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage comprises a greater alcohol by volume percentage than the high gravity alcoholic beverage (a high gravity beer introduced to a forward osmosis system becomes concentrated as water is drawn out into an ethanol/glycerol/water draw solution where the diluted draw solution (a high gravity alcoholic beverage) is returned to its original strength (very-high gravity alcoholic beverage) by passing through a reverse osmosis, or RO, system; paragraphs [0012]-[0013], (0017]); and processing, via FO, the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage processed via RO, to produce the UHG alcoholic beverage (the forward osmosis system (FO) includes a membrane separation zone where the draw side of the membrane receives the full strength ethanol/glycerol/water draw solution as input (very-high density alcoholic beverage processed via RO) that draws water from the feed beer to produce a concentrated beer at up to 33 percent ABV (the UHG beverage); paragraphs [0012]-[00131), wherein the UHG alcoholic beverage comprises a greater ABV percentage than the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage (after being dewatered, the beer can be up to 33 percent ABV, and the draw solution can range from 28 to 38 percent ABV, which will be at the 28 percent low end of the range when it is spent (UHG output at higher ABV than very-high gravity beverage); paragraphs (0012]-[0013), [00171). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have modified the method as previously disclosed by Nguyen, in order to have provided wherein producing the UHG alcoholic beverage via the FO system comprises: processing, via reverse osmosis (RO) a high gravity alcoholic beverage to produce a very-high gravity alcoholic beverage, wherein the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage comprises a greater alcohol by volume percentage than the high gravity alcoholic beverage; and processing, via FO, the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage processed via RO, to produce the UHG alcoholic beverage, wherein the UHG alcoholic beverage comprises a greater ABV percentage than the very-high gravity alcoholic beverage, as previously disclosed by Coors, for providing a method to produce a beverage with reduced water content that reduces storage and transportation costs without noticeable loss in taste and aroma (Coors; paragraphs (0003], (00111). Regarding claim 9, Nyugen and Coors do not specifically teach a VHG alcoholic beverage with an ABV of 14.1% to 23.9%. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the beginning and ending ABV of the ultra high gravity beverage depending on the alcohol content desired in the final product, as Nyugen teaches beers of all alcohol contents[0053]. Claim(s) 5,11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen(US 2010/0009031A1) in view of Coors(WO 2018/200538A1) further in view of Millipore(Millipore Sigma member filter search page). As per claim 5, Nguyen and Coors, in combination, disclose the method of claim 4, and Nguyen further discloses wherein the pre-filter comprises a membrane (filter techniques (a pre-filter) include a membrane filter; paragraph [00691). Nguyen does not disclose a cellulose membrane or a polypropylene membrane comprising an average particle filtration size between 1.0 and 1.5 microns. However, Millipore discloses a cellulose membrane or a polypropylene membrane comprising an average particle filtration size between 1.0 and 1.5 microns. (cellulose acetate filters are available with filtration levels of 1.0 and 1.2 microns; first three items on search page). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have modified the method as previously disclosed by Nguyen, in order to have provided a cellulose membrane or a polypropylene membrane comprising an average particle filtration size between 1.0 and 1 .5 microns, as previously disclosed by Millipore, for providing a method to provide a commercially available specific micron rated membrane filter made from inert cellulose esters (Millipore; first three items on search page). As per claim 11, Nguyen and Coors, in combination, disclose the method of claim 10, and Nguyen further discloses wherein the pre-filter comprises a membrane (filter techniques (a pre-filter) include a membrane filter; paragraph [0069)). Nguyen does not disclose a cellulose membrane or a polypropylene membrane comprising an average particle filtration size between 1.0 and 1.5 microns; and/or a fine-filter comprising one or more of a ceramic filter membrane, a polysulfone membrane, a polypropylene filter, and/or a diatomaceous earth depth filter having an average particle filtration size between 0.45 and 0.8 microns. However, Millipore discloses a cellulose membrane or a polypropylene membrane comprising an average particle filtration size between 1.0 and 1.5 microns. (cellulose acetate filters are available with filtration levels of 1.0 and 1.2 microns; first three items on search page). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have modified the method as previously disclosed by Nguyen, in order to have provided a cellulose membrane or a polypropylene membrane comprising an average particle filtration size between 1.0 and 1.5 microns; and/or a fine-filter comprising one or more of a ceramic filter membrane, a polysulfone membrane, a polypropylene filter, and/or a diatomaceous earth depth filter having an average particle filtration size between 0.45 and 0.8 microns, as previously disclosed by Millipore, for providing a method to provide a commercially available specific micron rated membrane filter made from inert cellulose esters (Coors; first three items on search page). As per claim 12, Nguyen, Coors and Millipore, in combination, disclose the method of claim 11, and Nguyen further discloses wherein the UHG alcoholic beverage is between 41 percent and 50 percent alcohol by volume (the beer incudes all possible alcohol contents; paragraph [0053]). Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen(US 2010/0009031A1) in view of Coors(WO 2018/200538A1) and Millipore(Millipore Sigma member filter search page) further in view of Wang(5,869,174). As per claim 6, Nguyen, Coors and Millipore, in combination, disclose the method of claim 5, and Nguyen further discloses wherein the fine-filter comprises a membrane (filter techniques (a fine-filter) include a membrane filter; paragraph [00691). Nguyen does not disclose a ceramic filter membrane, a polysulfone membrane, a polypropylene filter, and/or a viscose, silica, or perlite diatomaceous earth depth filter having an average particle filtration size between 0.45 and 0.8 microns. However, Wang discloses a ceramic filter membrane, a polysulfone membrane, a polypropylene filter, and/or a viscose, silica, or perlite diatomaceous earth depth filter having an average particle filtration size between 0.45 and 0.8 microns (polyethersulfone (a polysulfone) membranes are available with mean flow pore diameters of 0.45 and 0.65 microns; column 2, lines 59-65; column 3, lines 1-9). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have modified the method as previously disclosed by Nguyen, in order to have disclose a ceramic filter membrane, a polysulfone membrane, a polypropylene filter, and/or a viscose, silica, or per1ite diatomaceous earth depth filter having an average particle filtration size between 0.45 and 0.8 microns, as previously disclosed by Wang, for providing a method to provide a sterilizable membrane filter that are typically used to clarify wine and beer (Wang; column 2, lines 59-65; column 3, lines 1-9). As per claim 7, Nguyen, Coors, Millipore and Wang, in combination, disclose the method of claim 6, and Nguyen further discloses wherein the UHG alcoholic beverage is a beer, cider, or fermented malt beverage (beer (UHG alcoholic beverage) is stabilized through a cooling step and a filtration step; paragraphs (0030), [00341). As per claim 8, Nguyen, Coors, Millipore and Wang, in combination, disclose the method of claim 7, and Nguyen further discloses wherein the UHG alcoholic beverage includes haze compounds prior to entering the filtration system, and wherein filtration system removes the haze compounds and haze precursors from the UHG alcoholic beverage (final beer (UHG alcoholic beverage) stabilization and filtration steps allow polyphenol-protein aggregates (haze compounds) to form, and the following filtration steps remove the precipitate polyphenols and haze active proteins from the beer; paragraph (00241). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 21 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. As such, Nguyen teaches against setting the temperature of the holding tank below zero. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 6/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues that the cited references do not teach processing a high gravity (HG) alcoholic beverage having 5% to 14% ABV via reverse osmosis to form a very-high gravity (VHG) alcoholic beverage having a greater alcohol by volume percentage (ABV) than the HG alcoholic beverage; processing the VHG alcoholic beverage and a draw solution via forward osmosis to form the UHG alcoholic beverage having a greater ABV and, via forward osmosis, output the UHG alcoholic beverage and spent draw solution. However, Coors teaches of forward and reverse osmosis to produce a beverage concentrate. Since these are both well-known methods of concentrating alcohol, it would have been obvious to use both reverse osmosis and forward osmosis to produce the VHG and UHG alcoholic beverage. As such, Coors teaches multiple RO and FO filtration steps(para 12-13). Therefore, to arrive at the claimed invention would involve no more than routine experimentation. 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 KATHERINE D LEBLANC whose telephone number is (571)270-1136. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM EST M-F. 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, Nikki Dees can be reached at 571-270-3435. 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. /KATHERINE D LEBLANC/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1791
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 12, 2021
Application Filed
Jun 15, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 29, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 05, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 22, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 12, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 20, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 01, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 17, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12593859
HIGH LOAD FLAVOR PARTICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12532897
FROZEN CONFECTION MANUFACTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12495822
Structuring Agent for Use in Foods
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12478076
COFFEE COMPOSITION AND ITEMS MADE THEREFROM
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12439943
SEAFOOD/LIVESTOCK MEAT PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT AGENT AND SEAFOOD/LIVESTOCK MEAT PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 14, 2025

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate 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
34%
Grant Probability
58%
With Interview (+24.5%)
4y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 594 resolved cases by this examiner