Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/010,546

SANITARY INSERT

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 15, 2022
Priority
Jun 18, 2020 — DE 20 2020 103 532.0 +1 more
Examiner
BOECKMANN, JASON J
Art Unit
3752
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Neoperl GmbH
OA Round
4 (Final)
49%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
1m
Est. Remaining
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 49% of resolved cases
49%
Career Allowance Rate
483 granted / 987 resolved
-21.1% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1045
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
78.0%
+38.0% vs TC avg
§102
11.0%
-29.0% vs TC avg
§112
3.6%
-36.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 987 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . 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. Claim(s) 1, 2,4-6, 8-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stein (2016/0222637) in view of Tasi (2007/0196177). Regarding claim 1, Stein shows a sanitary insert part, comprising a housing (8) having a downstream side (bottom) and an upstream side (top), the downstream side (3) having an outlet structure (the outlet of 8) formed thereon, an upstream screen (19), is arranged on the upstream side (fig 8), wherein the upstream screen is connected to the outlet structure via a connecting element (10) formed on the housing which runs through an entire axial length of an interior space of the housing (fig 8) from the downstream side to the upstream side (the space is the area inside element 8 which is the housing. Connecting element ruins trough he entire space inside element 8) and wherein a portion of the connecting element (10) is configured to be inserted through an opening in the upstream screen (10 is inserted through the opening at the bottom of the screen 19 formed by the rim of the screen) to form the connection. But fails to disclose that the connection is a snap fit connection. Tasi teaches snap fit connection between the screen and a connecting element 322. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to make the connection between the screen and the connecting element a snap fit connection in order to have the screen securely attached to the connecting element. Regarding claim 2, wherein the interior space of the housing has at least one functional unit (101), arranged therein through which the connecting element (10) is inserted. Regarding claim 4, Stein as modified above shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1, but fails to show the at least one functional unit is snap- fitted to the connecting element. The examiner notes that snap fitting two elements together is well known in the art. Tasi even teaches snapping one element (40) into another element (322). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to snap fit the at least one functional unit is snap- fitted to the connecting element in order to allow for easy assembly and disassembly. Regarding claim 5, wherein a snap-fit interface is formed in the connecting element (between 10 and 18). Regarding claim 6, wherein the upstream screen is plugged onto the connecting element (fig 7). Regarding claim 8, wherein the at least one functional unit is a jet splitter (101 has multiple outlet so therefore is splits the flow into separate jets) and wherein the housing, at least below the jet splitter, in the interior space (fig 8), is formed in an undercut-free manner (fig 8), and has a cylindrical inner contour (fig 8). Regarding claim 9, wherein the connecting element (10) is in the form of a holding pin (fig 8). Regarding claim 10, wherein the connecting element is arranged on a longitudinal central axis of the housing (fig 8). Regarding claim 11, wherein the outlet structure is formed on the housing (fig 8). Regarding claim 12, wherein the upstream screen (40) is supported at its outer periphery against the housing (fig 4). Regarding claim 13, wherein the housing (101) is of single-part form. Regarding claim 15, wherein the functional unit is at least one of: a jet splitter (101 has multiple outlets so it splits up water jets). Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stein (2016/0222637) as modified by Tasi (2007/0196177) above in view of Grether et al.(2009/0224067). Regarding claim 14, Stein as modified above shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the housing is received by a screw sleeve, in particular for forming at least one aeration channel. Grether et al shows a sanitary part (1) including wherein the housing (3 and the element below 3) is received by a screw sleeve (2), in particular for forming at least one aeration channel (between 2 and the element below 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to use the screw sleeve (2) of Grether et al to attach the sanitary element of Stein as modified above to the sink outlet in order to have the sink dispense aerated water. The aeration channel will inherently be located between the sleeve 2 and the body of Stein. Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aghnides (2,962,225) in view of Tasi (2007/0196177), further in view of Zhou (2014/0300010) Regarding claim 16, Aghnides shows a sanitary insert part (fig 1), comprising: a housing (18, 17, 21) having a downstream side (bottom), an upstream side (top), and an interior space (inside of 21), the housing comprising an outlet structure (12) formed on the downstream side of the housing, the housing further comprising a connecting element (19) formed on the housing, wherein the connecting element runs through an entire axial length of an interior space of the housing (fig 1) from the downstream side to the upstream side (element 18 extend from the upstream to the downstream side of the housing space inside element 21), wherein a thickening (20) is formed on the connecting element; and an upstream screen (the upper screen 7 is upstream to the lower screen 7) arranged on the upstream side of the housing (upstream screen 7 is above the lowest downstream part of the housing (fig 1), wherein the thickening formed on the connecting element is configured to be inserted through an opening defined by the upstream screen (fig 1) But fails to disclose that the upstream screen is configured to be snap-fitted to the outlet structure via a snap-action connection produced by an interaction of the thickening formed on the connecting element And wherein radial slits are formed in the upstream screen to define the opening. Tasi teaches snap fit connection between the screen and a connecting element 322 produced by an interaction of the thickening (45) formed on the connecting element Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to make the connection between the screen and the connecting element a snap fit connection in order to have the screen securely attached to the connecting element. The above combination still fails to disclose wherein radial slits are formed in the upstream screen to define the opening for the snap fit connection. Zhou teaches a scree that is made of radial slits are formed in the screen (6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to make the screen forms of radial slits, in order to make the screen easier to manufacture as it can be molded. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 4/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the rejection of claim 1, the examiner notes that the housing is being considered element 8 of Stein. Element 8 has an interior space that element 10 runs through (fig 8). Element 10 runs through the space inside element 8 for its entire axial length (fig 8). The Tsai reference is only being used to teach the snap fit connection Regarding the rejection of claim 16, the examiner notes that the housing is being considered element 21, 17 of Aghnides. Element 21, 17 has an interior space that element 19 runs through (fig 1). Element 19 runs through the space inside element 21, 17 for its entire axial length (fig 1). The Tsai reference is only being used to teach the snap fit connection. The above rejections are being maintained. 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 JASON J BOECKMANN whose telephone number is (571)272-2708. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm. 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, Arthur Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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. /JASON J BOECKMANN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 5/6/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 1 earlier event
May 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Jul 22, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 03, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Nov 03, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 04, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Apr 14, 2026
Response Filed
May 08, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12611479
APPARATUS FOR DELIVERING A VOLATILE MATERIAL
2y 3m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12611682
SPRAY HEAD ASSEMBLY, DISPENSING SYSTEM, ELECTRODE SHEET STRIP, AND ELECTRODE
2y 6m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12605722
Gardening Sprayer
2y 12m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12594572
ARTICULATED AND EXTENDIBLE ROTARY HEAD FOR A PRESSURISED AIR JET SPRAY GUN
5y 3m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594566
SPRAY GUN, IN PARTICULAR A PRESSURISED AIR ATOMISATION PAINT SPRAY GUN, IN PARTICULAR A HAND-HELD PRESSURISED AIR ATOMISATION PAINT SPRAY GUN
3y 7m 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
49%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+28.9%)
3y 7m (~1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 987 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