Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/004,401

METHOD FOR PRODUCING A SOIL CONDITIONING AGENT

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 05, 2023
Examiner
LANGEL, WAYNE A
Art Unit
1736
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Ccm Technologies Limited
OA Round
2 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
1275 granted / 1622 resolved
+13.6% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
1668
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
33.6%
-6.4% vs TC avg
§102
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§112
37.6%
-2.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1622 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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. Claims 1, 3, 5 and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the article by Matthew J. Riding (“Harmonising conflicts between science, regulation, perception and environmental impact: The case of soil conditioners from bioenergy”) in view of CA 2812215 A1. Riding discloses the addition of wood ash to a digestate in Section 2.4 on page 34, and further discloses in Section 2.2 on page 33 that the digestate may be anaerobic. The difference between the process disclosed by Riding, and that recited in claims 1, 3, 5 and 8-13, is that Riding does not disclose that the mixture of digestate and wood ash should be contacted with a composition comprising carbon dioxide. CA 2812215 A1 discloses in the paragraph bridging pages 39 and 40 that carbon dioxide is used to adjust the pH of digested manure effluents. It would be obvious from CA 2812215 A1 to add carbon dioxide to the composition of Riding. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so, since Riding discloses in Section 2.4 that the complementary nutrient profiles of ash and digestate suggest that a combined use of both waste streams could be considered suitable for application to land as fertilizers , and CA 2812215 A1 teaches on page 1, lines 7-12 that anaerobic digestates contain significant amounts of various nutrients, including nitrogen, phosphorus and other plant nutrients, and it is well-known that fertilizers should have a pH of about 7 so that the soil would not become too acidic or too alkaline. Regarding claim 8, Riding discloses in Section 3.1 that the composition can be used as a soil amendment, and soil amendments are conventionally in the form of pellets. Regarding claims 9-13, the properties recited therein would be inherent in the composition of Riding when applied topsoil, since the soil conditioner of Riding comprises a combination of wood ash and anaerobic digestate. Claims 2, 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riding in view of CA 2812215 A1, applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Grech et al (US 2017/0144940). It would be further obvious from Grech et al to include gypsum in combination with the composition of Riding as the soil amendment. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so, since Grech et al teach in Paragraph [0006] that it is known to supply gypsum to soil to supply calcium. Regarding claim 6, it would be within the level of skill of one of ordinary skill in the art to determine a suitable ration of ash to gypsum in the composition. Response to Arguments Applicant’s argument, that Riding discusses ash and digestate only as separate soil amendments, not as components of a combined composition, is not convincing, since Riding teaches in Section 2.4 that the complimentary nutrient profiles of ash and digestate suggest that a combined use of both waste streams could be considered suitable for application to land as fertilizers to maximize their potential gains. This teaching would suggest a combination of the wood ash and anaerobic digestate. Applicant’s argument, that CA 2812215 A1 discloses adding carbon dioxide only to lime-treated, separated liquid effluent for stripping ammonia and reducing pH, which process occurs after liquid solid-liquid separation and is directed to a chemically altered liquid stream bearing no resemblance to the unseparated ash-digestate admixture recited in applicant’s claims, is not convincing, since CA 2812215 A1 discloses on page 39, lines 29-31 that carbon dioxide was supplied to the digested manure effluent before lime treatment. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate from such disclosure that it would be useful to add carbon dioxide to a mixture of ash and digestate, as well as to the digestate itself. 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 WAYNE A LANGEL whose telephone number is (571) 272-1353. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8:15 am to 4: 15 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3591. 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. /WAYNE A LANGEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 05, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 08, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 16, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599151
BIOCHARS, BIOCHAR EXTRACTS AND BIOCHAR EXTRACTS HAVING SOLUBLE SIGNALING COMPOUNDS AND METHOD FOR CAPTURING MATERIAL EXTRACTED FROM BIOCHAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590043
COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR IMPROVING PLANT GROWTH AND ABIOTIC STRESS TOLERANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583802
AUTONOMOUS DEVICE FOR IN-FIELD CONVERSION OF BIOMASS INTO BIOCHAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583801
PROCESS FOR PRODUCING FERTILIZER FROM A BIOGAS STREAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577179
Methods and Compositions for Soil Regeneration and Improved Soil Hydrology
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
99%
With Interview (+23.3%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1622 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