Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 17/802,023

CONCENTRATION METHOD AND EQUIPMENT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 24, 2022
Priority
Oct 23, 2019 — CN 201911014863.3 +3 more
Examiner
MENON, KRISHNAN S
Art Unit
1777
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Inner Mongolia Mengniu Dairy (Group) Co. Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allowance Rate
898 granted / 1500 resolved
-5.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
67 currently pending
Career history
1563
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
83.6%
+43.6% vs TC avg
§102
7.6%
-32.4% vs TC avg
§112
4.4%
-35.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1500 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-3, 5-6 and 11-15 in the reply filed on 5/21/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the restriction must be based on PCT rules, and that a unit of invention exist between the restricted groups. This is not found persuasive because restriction is based on not lack of unity, but lack of a special technical feature that links the claims. Such a feature must be patentable over the prior arts, which is not present in this case. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and 103 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. 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. Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCCLOSKEY et al. (US 2017/0258103) in view of Bell, et al “STABILITY OF MILK AND ITS CONCENTRATES IN FROZEN STORAGE AT VARIOUS TEMPERATURES” Journal of Dairy Science, January 1952. PNG media_image1.png 497 1357 media_image1.png Greyscale McCloskey teaches a method of concentrating raw milk using a cascade of reverse osmosis. See the abstract and the figures. Raw milk is concentrated in multi-stage RO systems [0039]. Concentrate recycle set-up – [0042]. Temperature, pressure and concentration – see [0018]. Operating pressure range from 200-1500 psig (13.7 – 103 Bars) – [0074]. This range falls within the claimed ranges of 1-50, 30-60 and 50-200 bars from low end of low pressure to high end of high pressure RO (pressure is progressively increasing with the stages.) The pressure is also concentration-dependent, (Id.) and increases as concentrations in each stage increase. Operating temperature is 45-600 F (abstract), and <150 C in working examples. The solids content in the milk product is 40% SNF, or 45% Total solids [0007], [0046]-[0047]. McCloskey does not explicitly teach specific low and high pressure stages, but such are implied in the pressure ranges. Particularly, see [0033] which teaches the pressure required as in excess of the osmotic pressure. Therefore, as the milk concentrates, the operating pressure also must be increased to overcome the osmotic pressure increase. Thus McCloskey process also would have progressively higher pressure on downstream stages, which would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, if not anticipated. Looking at example 1, operation is at two pressure ranges, and temperature 50-550 F, meaning claims 1, 2, 6 and 11 are clearly anticipated by McCloskey. Milk is cooled after RO to <450 F – example 1. Cooling by conventional means [0103.] Also, cleaning the system after use is implied, especially in dairy industry, which is a common practice. While McCloskey is silent on the cooling steps and freezing, use of ethylene glycol-water solution as coolant medium (anti-freeze) is well-known in the art for freezers. Cooling and freezing milk for preservation and storage is also well known in the art as is clear from the NPL to Bell cited herein. Applicant’s disclosure at fig. 6 also describes the concentrate milk as “transported to quick-freezing warehouse,” meaning, the freezing step is not inventive. Combining known processes to obtain predictable results is prima facie obvious – see MPEP 2143-I, A-G: rationales to combine. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/26/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. They are addressed in the rejection. Any “unexpected result” argument is not evidence against an anticipation rejection. And there is no showing of any unexpected result. Two-stage cooling is not inventive – staged cooling is known in the art. Tubular heat exchangers are also very common. However, these are also claimed in the alternative. Two NPL references are provided herewith in an 892 showing that use of staged cooling and tubular heat exchangers are common in the dairy industry. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISHNAN S MENON whose telephone number is (571)272-1143. The examiner can normally be reached Flexible, but generally Monday-Friday: 8:00AM-4:30PM. 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, Prem C Singh can be reached at 571-272-6381. 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. /KRISHNAN S MENON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 1 earlier event
Aug 24, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Sep 03, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 26, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Nov 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 29, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12673301
MULTILAYER POROUS MEMBRANE WITH INCOMPATIBLE RESINS
3y 8m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673300
COMPOSITE SEMIPERMEABLE MEMBRANE, AND SPIRAL MEMBRANE ELEMENT
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673887
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PRE-TREATING HIGH STRENGTH WASTEWATER
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12663403
FILTER ASSEMBLIES, DEPTH INDICATORS, TORQUE-LIMITING FITTINGS, TORQUE-INDICATING FITTINGS, AND SYSTEMS INCORPORATING THE SAME
4y 3m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12654139
METHOD FOR IMPROVING THE AIRTIGHTNESS OF BUILDINGS USING A BIOPOLYMER-BASED MEMBRANE
2y 11m to grant Granted Jun 16, 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
60%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+11.8%)
3y 3m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1500 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