Office Action Predictor
Application No. 17/922,923

OLEFIN POLYMERIZATION BIMETALLIC ACTIVATORS

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Nov 02, 2022
Examiner
LEE, RIP A
Art Unit
1762
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Dow Global Technologies LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

83%
Career Allow Rate
1117 granted / 1343 resolved
Without
With
+-10.9%
Interview Lift
avg trend
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
38 pending
1381
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§102
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§112
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION This office action follows a response filed on November 11, 2025. Claims 1 and 9 were amended and claim 11 was canceled. Claims 1-10, 12, and 13 are pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claims 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) 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 defines an embodiment of invention in which R2 is C(H) and R3 is (C1-C30)hydrocarbyl or (C1-C30)heterohydrocarbyl. The definition of R3 is broader in scope than the definition in the independent claim in which R3 is (C1-C10)alkyl; see page 3, line 8. Therefore, the subject of claim 4 fails to limit further the subject of claim 1. Claim 5 defines an embodiment of invention in which R2 is C(H) and R3 is (C1-C20)alkyl or (C1-C10)alkyl. The limitation R3 is (C1-C20)alkyl is broader in scope than the limitation in the independent claim in which R3 is (C1-C10)alkyl and the limitation that R3 is (C1-C10)alkyl repeats the limitation set forth in the independent claim. Therefore, the subject of claim 5 fails to limit further the subject of claim 1. Claim 9 defines an embodiment of invention in which R3 is connected to R2 to form a ring. The scope of anions encompassed by this limitation alone lies beyond the limitation set forth in the independent claim in which anions are represented by a structure according to formula (Ia); see page 3, line 10. Therefore, the subject of claim 9 fails to limit further the subject of claim 1. Claims 10, 12, and 13, which depend from claim 9, are subsumed under the rejection. 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. Response to Arguments The rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) as failing to comply with the enablement requirement, set forth in paragraph 2 in the previous office action dated August 11, 2025, has been withdrawn in view of claim amendment. The rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LaPointe (US 6,395,671), set forth in paragraph 5 of the previous office action, has been overcome by amendment. Reference does not teach a bimetallic activator complex containing an anion having represented by formula (Ia) in which at least one of R32 and R33 is -CH2Si(RC)3. The rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Babb et al. (US 6,627,573), set forth in paragraph 6 of the previous office action, has been overcome by amendment. Reference does not teach a bimetallic activator complex containing an anion having represented by formula (I) in which R2 is C(H) and R3 is (C1-C10)alkyl. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-3 and 6-8 are allowed. 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 Rip A. Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-1104. The examiner can be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Jones, can be reached at (571)270-7733. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /RIP A LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1762 January 27, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 02, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 02, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 11, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 27, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 30, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12595322
GAS-PHASE BIPHENYLPHENOL POLYMERIZATION CATALYSTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594538
CONTINUOUS PROCESSOR UTILIZING QUANTUM FIELD MICRO-VARIABLE PARTICLE INTERACTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590245
LONG-PERSISTENT LUMINESCENCE EMITTER AND LONG-PERSISTENT LUMINESCENT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583984
THERMOPLASTIC POLYMER COMPOSITION AND METHOD FOR MAKING FILMS FROM THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577334
Broad Orthogonal Distribution Polyethylenes for Films
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate 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
83%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (-10.9%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1343 resolved cases by this examiner