Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/928,302

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR INTRODUCING A COMPONENT INTO A FLUID SUPPLY

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 29, 2022
Examiner
HOWELL, MARC C
Art Unit
1774
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kimberly-Clark Worldwide Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
366 granted / 540 resolved
+2.8% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
572
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
47.4%
+7.4% vs TC avg
§102
20.9%
-19.1% vs TC avg
§112
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 540 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 without traverse of Group I, claims 1-15, in the reply filed on 08/18/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 16-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02/07/2023 and 07/29/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claims 1-8 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rezai et al. (US PGPub 2003/0060112, hereinafter Rezai). Regarding claim 1, Rezai discloses a method for introducing a component into a fluid supply, the method comprising: providing a component feed system (figure 1, unit 10); providing a supply of the component to the component feed system (via unit 12); providing a fluid supply (air stream 21 provided to eductor 15); introducing the component into the fluid supply (in eductor 15); and controlling gas entrainment into the fluid supply as the component is introduced into the fluid supply (via eductor 15 and hopper 14). Regarding claim 2, Rezai discloses introducing the component into the fluid supply comprises transferring the fluid supply through an eductor (figure 1, eductor 15). Regarding claim 3, Rezai teaches controlling gas entrainment into the fluid supply as the component is introduced into the fluid supply comprises sealing the component feed system (figure 1, at least hopper 14 appears to be sealed). Regarding claim 4, Rezai discloses controlling gas entrainment into the fluid supply as the component is introduced into the fluid supply further comprises controlling air flow into the component feed system (figure 1, at least hopper 14 is enclosed, which would control air flow at least to some degree). Regarding claim 5, Rezai discloses providing a housing surrounding the component feed system (figure 1, screw 12, feeder 13, and hopper 14 can be seen to have a housing). Regarding claim 6, Rezai discloses the component feed system comprises a bulk solids pump (figure 1, screw feeder 12). Regarding claim 7, Rezai discloses the component is a particulate (paragraph 0068, “absorbent gelling particles”). Regarding claim 8, Rezai discloses the particulate is superabsorbent material (paragraph 0068, “absorbent gelling particles”). Regarding claim 10, Rezai discloses a method for introducing a component into a fluid supply, the method comprising: providing a component feed system (figure 1, unit 10), the component feed system comprising an outlet conduit (downstream of hopper 14); providing a supply of the component to the component feed system (at unit 12); providing a fluid supply (air stream 21 provided to eductor 15); transferring the fluid supply through an eductor (eductor 15), the eductor comprising a venturi section (an eductor is commonly known as a Venturi pump); introducing the component into the fluid supply (within eductor 15); and controlling a pressure on the component feed system by controlling a position of a distal end of the outlet conduit within the venturi section of the eductor (via eductor 15 and hopper 14). Regarding claim 11, Rezai discloses providing a housing surrounding the component feed system to seal it (figure 1, screw 12, feeder 13, and hopper 14 can be seen to have a housing). Regarding claim 12, controlling the pressure on the component feed system further comprises bleeding in at least some air flow to the component feed system (figure 1, air would be introduced in a least some amount through screw 12). Regarding claim 13, Rezai discloses the particulate is superabsorbent material (paragraph 0068, “absorbent gelling particles”). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 9, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rezai et al. (US PGPub 2003/0060112, hereinafter Rezai) in view of Rokman et al. (US 6019871, hereinafter Rokman). Regarding claim 9, Rezai is silent to the fluid supply being a foam. Rokman teaches mixing a foam with particulates (figure 1, foam slurry 11 is mixed in a flow mixer with super absorbent polymer from receptacle 29). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the method of Rezai with a foam as the fluid supply for the purpose of producing a desired product, such as the foam product of Rokman. Regarding claim 14, Rezai is silent to the fluid supply being a foam. Rokman is relied upon, as above, to teach a foam, and further to teach the foam comprising a fluid and a surfactant (column 2, lines 29-30). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the method of Rezai with a foam as the fluid supply for the purpose of producing a desired product, such as the foam product of Rokman. Regarding claim 15, Rezai is silent to the fluid supply being a foam. Rokman is relied upon, as above, to teach a foam, and further to teach the foam containing a plurality of fibers (column 2, lines 29-30). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the method of Rezai with a foam as the fluid supply for the purpose of producing a desired product, such as the foam product of Rokman. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art generally discloses eductors for combining fluid with particulates. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC C HOWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-9834. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5. 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, Claire Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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. /MARC C HOWELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 29, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594530
CAN MIXING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582950
Industrial Mixing Machine
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576556
HYDRATION SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564291
METHOD OF OPERATING A STAND MIXER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12564290
MAGNETIC COMPASS INTERLOCK VESSEL DETECTION AND VESSEL RECOGNITION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+25.4%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 540 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