Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/026,242

METHOD FOR INCREASING CONTENT AND GENE EXPRESSION OF AROMATIC SUBSTANCE IN FRUITS AND VEGETABLES BY USING HYDROGEN-RICH WATER

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 14, 2023
Examiner
CONIGLIO, AUDREA JUNE BUCKLEY
Art Unit
1617
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
L'Air Liquide, Société Anonyme pour l'Etude et l'Exploitation des Procédés Georges Claude
OA Round
2 (Final)
53%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
75%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 53% of resolved cases
53%
Career Allow Rate
442 granted / 832 resolved
-6.9% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
882
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
50.5%
+10.5% vs TC avg
§102
8.9%
-31.1% vs TC avg
§112
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 832 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Status of the Claims Claims 1-15, 17, 18, 20, 25, 26, 30, and 34 have been canceled. Accordingly, claims 16, 19, 21-24, 27-29, 31-33, and 35-39 are under examination and addressed below. Withdrawn Objections and Rejections and Response to Arguments The objection to claim 29 is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment to this claim. New grounds of rejection necessitated by amendment are presented below. The rejection of claims 16-39 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments to the claims. The rejection of claims 16-39 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as lacking full scope of enablement is withdrawn Applicant’s arguments to these effects are persuasive. All rejections of newly canceled claims are withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112, New Grounds of Rejection Necessitated by Amendments of 12/8/2025 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 29, 31-33, and 35-39 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 29 contains parenthetical recitations of pesticide species chemical names which appear to represent trade names in combination with an active ingredient name such that the required component and metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. For instance, claim 29 recites “pendimethalin (stomp)”, “chitosan (micron chitin)”, “kasugmycin (kasmuin)”, azoxystrobin (spermimepyrizoil)”, tetrachlorantraniliprole (tetrachloramide)”, “azoxystrobin (spermimepyrizoil)” “metiram (azolidazole ether derivatives)”, “flowers phosphorus dynamics”, and “propamocarb hydrochloride (dimethomyl hydrocoloride)” where at least one of the items in each of the aforementioned listed items appears to represent, although now uncapitalized, a trademark/trade name. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe various chemical compounds and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite. Claims 31-33 and 35-39 are rejected since they require all limitations of rejected base claim 29. Appropriate clarification is required as to what chemical compounds are encompassed in the list of pesticides recited. Conclusion The prior art does not teach with sufficient specificity claims 16, 19, 21-24, 27, and 28; these claims are considered in condition for allowance. 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 AUDREA B CONIGLIO whose telephone number is (571)270-1336. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 a.m. - 5:30 p.m.. 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, Michael Hartley can be reached at 5712720616. 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. /AUDREA B CONIGLIO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1617
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 14, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 08, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 08, 2026
Final Rejection — §112
Apr 10, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599137
Composition for the Drying of Tillandsia sp
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599699
CO-CROSSLINKED HYALURONIC ACID-SILK FIBROIN HYDROGELS FOR IMPROVING TISSUE GRAFT VIABILITY AND FOR SOFT TISSUE AUGMENTATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594231
EMULSIFIED COMPOSITION AND COSMETIC MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589062
POWDERY SOLID COSMETIC PREPARATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582120
COMPOSITIONS WITH FATTY ACIDS AND OPTIONAL CATIONIC COMPOUNDS AND METHODS OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
53%
Grant Probability
75%
With Interview (+21.6%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 832 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