Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 17/854,261

FABRICATION OF BENZOXAZINE FUNCTIONALIZED PARTICLES

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jun 30, 2022
Priority
Sep 08, 2021 — provisional 63/241,698
Examiner
ABU ALI, SHUANGYI
Art Unit
1731
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Palo Alto Research Center Incorporated
OA Round
2 (Final)
45%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3m
Est. Remaining
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 45% of resolved cases
45%
Career Allowance Rate
476 granted / 1058 resolved
-20.0% vs TC avg
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+38.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 1m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
1110
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
53.9%
+13.9% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1058 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 1-7, 9, 11-18 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 "the particle" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Regarding claim 1, “activated particles” in lines 4-5 is “silicon nitride activated particles”? Regarding claim 1, “acetylene-benzoxazine functionalized particles” in lines 8-10 is “acetylene-benzoxazine silicon carbide particles”? Claim 1 recites the limitation " the acetylene-benzoxazine silicon carbide particles " in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim Regarding claim 1, “silicon carbide particles” in line 14 is “acetylene-benzoxazine silicon carbide particles”? Claim 2 recites the limitation "the particle" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Regarding claim 3, “activated particles” in lines 2-3 is “silicon nitride activated particles”? Regarding claim 4, “activated particles” in lines 1-2 is “silicon nitride activated particles”? Regarding claim 5, “activated particles” in lines 1-2 is “silicon nitride activated particles”? Regarding claim 7, “acetylene-benzoxazine functionalized particles” in line 2 is “acetylene-benzoxazine silicon carbide particles”? Regarding claim 7, “benzoxazine functionalized particles” in line 3 is “acetylene-benzoxazine silicon carbide particles”? Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7, 9, 11-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHUANGYI ABU ALI whose telephone number is (571)272-6453. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am- 5:00 pm. 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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (571)270-3149. 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. /SHUANGYI ABU ALI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 30, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 03, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 01, 2026
Final Rejection — §112
Apr 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 30, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12612518
CHEMICALLY SURFACE MODIFIED CARBON BLACK AND METHODS OF MAKING SAME
2y 10m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12612519
CHEMICALLY SURFACE MODIFIED CARBON BLACK AND METHODS OF MAKING SAME
2y 4m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12600871
DYE-EXCHANGED ZEOLITE MARKER
1y 12m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595402
SHAPED ABRASIVE PARTICLES WITH LOW ROUNDNESS FACTOR
7y 4m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595180
ULTRA-WHITE SILICA-BASED FILLER
3y 0m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
45%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+38.1%)
4y 1m (~3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1058 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