Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/767,386

RUBBER MASTERBATCH PREPARATION

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Apr 07, 2022
Examiner
SCOTT, ANGELA C
Art Unit
1767
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Ceat Limited
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
549 granted / 875 resolved
-2.3% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
924
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
50.8%
+10.8% vs TC avg
§102
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
§112
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 875 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 24, 2025 has been entered with the RCE submission of December 18, 2025. Claim 1 is amended and claims 4 and 5 are cancelled. Claims 1, 2, 6, and 7 are pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyasaka et al. (US 2015/0133592) Regarding claim 7, Miyasaka et al. teaches an elastomer composite comprising carbon black and a rubber latex such as natural rubber (¶19, 23). Miyasaka et al. additionally teaches a rubber composition (formulation) comprising the elastomer composite and optional agents such as a sulfur-containing vulcanizer, a vulcanization promoter, silica, a silane coupling agent, zinc oxide, stearic acid, a vulcanization promoting aid, a vulcanization retarder, an organic peroxide, an anti-aging agent, softening agents such as a wax and an oil, and a processing aid (¶46). Miyasaka et al. does not teach that the elastomer composite is prepared by the process of instant claim 1. However, this limitation is a product-by-process limitation. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). In this case, the rubber composition taught by Miyasaka et al. comprising natural rubber (from the natural rubber latex), carbon black, and another additive listed above is the same as the formulation as claimed, and the claim is unpatentable even though the prior art product was made by a different process. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 2, and 6 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Independent claim 1 is directed to a process for preparing an elastomer composite in an extruder, said process comprising (a) providing at least one dry solid particulate ingredient in powder or granular form, in a first mixing zone to obtain a first mix; (b) providing at least one elastomer in a second mixing zone to obtain a second mix; (c) contacting the first mix and the second mix to obtain a third mix; and (d) processing the third mix to obtain an elastomer composite, wherein the first mixing zone and the second mixing zone have a temperature in the range of 30° C – 50° C, the processing of the third mix is carried out at a temperature in the range of 120° C – 200° C and a mixing speed in the range of 450 - 1050 rpm, wherein the at least one dry solid particulate ingredient is selected from the group consisting of carbon black, silica, calcium carbonate, clay, and combinations thereof, wherein the at least one elastomer is selected from the group consisting of natural rubber latex, styrene butadiene rubber latex, butadiene rubber latex, acrylonitrile butadiene rubber latex, chloroprene rubber latex, neoprene rubber latex, and combinations thereof, and wherein the process is carried out in a single co-rotating twin screw extruder (CRTSE). The closest prior art of record, Wang et al. (US 2011/0021664), does not teach this process wherein the particulate component is added to the extruder dry, i.e., not as a slurry, and wherein the process is carried out in a single co-rotating twin screw extruder. None of the other prior art of record teaches this process or renders it obvious. Therefore, claims 1, 2, and 6 are allowable. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 4-9, filed November 24, 2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 2, and 6 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1, 2, and 6 has been withdrawn. However, these arguments are not found persuasive with respect to claim 7, which is directed to a formulation comprising a solid particulate ingredient, an elastomer, and an additional additive. This claim is not subject to the limitations of the process of claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected as set forth above. Correspondence Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA C SCOTT whose telephone number is (571)270-3303. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30-5:00, EST. 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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at 571-272-1197. 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. /ANGELA C SCOTT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 07, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
May 09, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Nov 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 18, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593762
PLANT FIBER BIOCOMPOSITES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12552925
INJECTION MOLDED ARTICLE AND SHOE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12545053
TIRES FOR VEHICLE WHEELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12540251
Thermoplastic polymer powder for 3D printing with improved recyclability
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12534408
IMPROVEMENT OF THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF WATERPROOFED GYPSUM BOARDS WITH POLYDIMETHYLSILOXANES
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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
63%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+20.1%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 875 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