Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 26, 2026
Application No. 18/026,688

Bubble Column Reactor

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 16, 2023
Priority
Nov 23, 2021 — RE 10-2021-0162827 +1 more
Examiner
SINGH, DAPINDER
Art Unit
3746
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
LG Chem Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allowance Rate
739 granted / 896 resolved
+12.5% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
917
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.2%
-35.8% vs TC avg
§103
37.6%
-2.4% vs TC avg
§102
32.0%
-8.0% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 896 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 § 112 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 1-4, 8-10 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. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation “wherein spray directions of the first and third spray nozzles are each a downward vertical direction, wherein an angle between a spray direction of the second spray nozzle and the downward vertical direction is 150 to 500”, and the claim also recites “wherein a spray angle of the first spray nozzle is 950 to 1200,wherein a spray angle of the second spray nozzle is 150 to 450, and wherein a spray angle of the third spray nozzle is 500 to 900” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Furthermore, it cannot be ascertained how the first and third nozzles are directed vertically downwards meaning have 00 with the vertical and then also have different angles relative to the vertical direction at the same time. Clarification is required. Additional Subject Matter Even though claims 1-4, 8-10 are not rejected under prior art, they are rejected under 112(b) for being indefinite, and hence are not allowable. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) amended claim 1 have been considered but are moot because amended claim is indefinite and meets and bounds of the claim cannot be ascertained. 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 DAPINDER SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-1774. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:30 PM. 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, Mark Laurenzi can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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. /DAPINDER SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 16, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Mar 19, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 30, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Oct 15, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12767027
SHAPE-MEMORY ALLOY ACTUATOR ASSEMBLY
1y 10m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12768345
Parallel Pumping Controller with Load Sharing and Systems Including the Same
1y 0m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12758934
CATALYTIC REACTION UNIT AND REACTIVE DISTILLATION COLUMN
3y 5m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12760674
EXHAUST GAS AFTERTREATMENT SYSTEM FOR AN AMMONIA FUELED INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE
1y 7m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12753760
ROTARY COMPRESSOR AND REFRIGERATION CYCLE DEVICE HAVING THE SAME
2y 0m to grant Granted Oct 06, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+18.4%)
2y 2m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 896 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