Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/798,335

A SOAP COMPOSITION

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Aug 09, 2022
Examiner
OYER, ANDREW J
Art Unit
1767
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
CONOPCO, INC.
OA Round
2 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
467 granted / 589 resolved
+14.3% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
621
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
36.2%
-3.8% vs TC avg
§102
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
§112
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 589 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s amendments and arguments, filed 30 September 2025, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant has amended in limitations that appear to no longer read on naturally occurring materials. Accordingly, the 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn. 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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claims 1-15 and 19 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. Claim 1 recites the limitation "saturated soap" in Line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this is referencing the C16 to C24 saturated soap or other saturated soaps. As to Claim 1: It is unclear what soaps must be present in the composition and what amounts they can be present in. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 2 recites that there is 50 wt% C16:2-C18:2 soap and 50 wt% C16:1 -C18:1 soap based on the % by weight of the composition. However, claim 1 states that the composition must comprise 40-90 wt% of saturated soap.. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 3 recites that there is 50 wt% linoleic acid soap soap based on the % by weight of the composition. However, claim 1 states that the composition must comprise 40-90 wt% of saturated soap. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 4 recites “(b) 0.5 to 30% C18 unsaturated soap by weight of the composition”. However, claim 1 states that there must be less than 30 wt% C18 unsaturated soap based on the % by weight of the composition. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 14 recites the total amount of linoleic and oleic acid soap is from 0.5 to 30 wt%. However, claim 1 states that there must be less than 30 wt% C18 unsaturated soap based on the % by weight of the composition. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 19 recites that there is the C16:1-C18:1 soap comprises at least 50 wt% oleic acid soap based on the % by weight of the composition. However, claim 1 states that the composition must comprise 40-90 wt% of saturated soap. It is not clear how the composition can contain at least 50% oleic acid soap and 40-90 wt% saturated soap. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. 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. Correspondence Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J OYER whose telephone number is (571)270-0347. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM 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, 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. /Andrew J. Oyer/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 09, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 09, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Sep 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 15, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603289
POLYVINYLIDENE FLUORIDE, BINDER, ELECTRODE MIXTURE, ELECTRODE, AND SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599797
ENVIRONMENTALLY-CLEAN FIRE INHIBITING AND EXTINGUISHING COMPOSITIONS AND PRODUCTS FOR SORBING FLAMMABLE LIQUIDS WHILE INHIBITING IGNITION AND EXTINGUISHING FIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599798
ENVIRONMENTALLY-CLEAN FIRE INHIBITING BIOCHEMICAL LIQUID COMPOSITIONS FOR FORMING THIN ALKALI METAL SALT CRYSTALLINE COATINGS ON COMBUSTIBLE SURFACES TO BE PROTECTED AGAINST FIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599799
CLASS-A FIRE-PROTECTED WOOD BUILDING PRODUCTS PROVIDED WITH CLASS-A FIRE PROTECTION, AND SURFACE TREATMENT PROCESS FOR PRODUCING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594448
ENVIRONMENTALLY-CLEAN AQUEOUS-BASED FIRE EXTINGUISHING BIOCHEMICAL LIQUID CONCENTRATES FOR MIXING WITH PROPORTIONED QUANTITIES OF WATER TO PRODUCE FIRE EXTINGUISHING WATER STREAMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
79%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+16.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 589 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