Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 17/775,221

REACTIVE OLIGOMERS, ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING METHODS, AND ARTICLES THEREOF

Final Rejection §103
Filed
May 06, 2022
Examiner
LISTVOYB, GREGORY
Art Unit
1765
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
OA Round
4 (Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
798 granted / 1195 resolved
+1.8% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1234
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
57.7%
+17.7% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
6.6%
-33.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1195 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . The previous prior art rejection under Ninomya et al (JPH10265591) maintained and therefore it is proper to make this rejection FINAL. Claim Objections Claim 63 objected to because of the following informalities: The cancelled formulas of diamines and dianhydrides should be properly crossed out. In claim 63 some diamines are represented in both forms: as crossed out and actually claimed . For instance 1.2 and 1.3 phenylene diamines presented in both statuses. 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. Claims 3, 61, 63-67 and 69 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ninomya et al (JPH10265591), cited in the previous Office Action. The rejection can be found in the NON-FINAL office action mailed 10/20/2025 and is herein incorporated by reference. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 2/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant submits that Ninomya’s polyamideimide is used as a sizing agent for a thermoplastic resin, while present claims drawn to a prepreg. However, the Reference and Applicant use the same monomers for reactive oligomer preparation. It is clear that desirable properties can be achieved by monomers ratio and molecular weight variation. Examiner agrees with Applicant that Yokota et al (JP 2004331801) does not teach polyamideimide As a result, rejection under 35 USC 103 over Yokota et al (JP 2004331801) is withdrawn. 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 GREGORY LISTVOYB whose telephone number is (571)272-6105. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm 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, Heidi Riviere Kelley can be reached at (571) 270-1831. 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. GL /GREGORY LISTVOYB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 06, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 18, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 24, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 25, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 20, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 20, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 10, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 02, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590182
POLYPHENYLENE ETHER MELT EXTRUSION FORMED BODY AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING POLYPHENYLENE ETHER MELT EXTRUSION FORMED BODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590184
POLYIMIDE RESIN MOLDED BODY AND PRODUCTION METHOD FOR SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583987
SURFACE MODIFYING COMPOSITION, MODIFIED PRODUCT, AND METHOD OF PRODUCING MODIFIED PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583974
POLYAMIDE-IMIDE-BASED FILM, PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF, AND COVER WINDOW AND DISPLAY DEVICE COMPRISING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583983
POLYIMIDE FILM HAVING HIGH DIMENSIONAL STABILITY, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+29.7%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1195 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