Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 26, 2026
Application No. 17/704,267

THERMOPLASTIC VULCANIZATES COMPRISING ACRYLATE RUBBER AND THERMOPLASTIC POLYURETHANE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 25, 2022
Priority
Mar 25, 2021 — provisional 63/165,926 +1 more
Examiner
USELDING, JOHN E
Art Unit
1763
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Parker-Hannifin Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allowance Rate
700 granted / 1300 resolved
-11.2% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
64 currently pending
Career history
1368
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
44.8%
+4.8% vs TC avg
§102
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§112
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1300 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 1-14 are 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. The limitation “about” throughout the claims is indefinite. Neither the claims nor the specification provide any indication as to the metes and bounds of the limitation “about”. Also, the antecedent basis of “the acrylate rubber” in the last line of claim 1 is unclear. There are four different acrylate rubber options in claim 1. Claim 2 is 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. The antecedent basis of “the acrylate rubber” is unclear. There are four different acrylate rubber options in claim 1. Claim 20 is 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. The limitation “about” throughout the claim is indefinite. Neither the claims nor the specification provide any indication as to the metes and bounds of the limitation “about”. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 8/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant has alleged that the person having ordinary skill in the art would have no difficulty ascertaining the scope of the claims with the limitation “about”. This is not persuasive because the applicant could not even provide a description of the scope of the claims in the remarks. The limitation is indefinite because the metes and bounds of the ranges are unclear. Conclusion 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. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN USELDING whose telephone number is (571)270-5463. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am to 6:30pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Del Sole can be reached on 571-272-1130. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JOHN E USELDING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 25, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Aug 27, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 23, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12767789
CURABLE RESIN COMPOSITION
3y 3m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12760175
Polyoxymethylene Polymer Composition For Rotational Molding Applications
4y 6m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12760194
Water-Based Ink Jet Ink Composition
3y 8m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12753119
UNCHARGED CLAY BLOCKING AGENT
4y 1m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12753262
PROCESS FOR THE REDUCTION OF REGIOISOMER WHERE THE DOUBLE BOND IS SHIFTED FROM ETHYLENICALLY UNSATURATED ALKOXYLATED ALCOHOLS
3y 6m to grant Granted Oct 06, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+17.9%)
2y 8m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1300 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