Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/033,863

THREE-WAY DIESEL CATALYST FOR COLD START TECHNOLOGY

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 26, 2023
Examiner
MCDONOUGH, JAMES E
Art Unit
1734
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
BASF Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
1017 granted / 1425 resolved
+6.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
1475
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
59.6%
+19.6% vs TC avg
§102
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
§112
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1425 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 . Claim Objections Claim16 objected to because of the following informalities: The claim states “Use of a catalyst” making the claim indefinite. Correction to “Method of using a catalyst” would overcome this rejection. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 1-10 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kumar et al. (EP-3170553-A2). Regarding claims 1-3 and 5-9 Kumar discloses dipping the inlet side of an axial end of a monolith substrate of corierite having about 400 flow passages into a slurry of catalyst then calcining to have a coating covering 70 % of the axial length and containing platinum (i.e., first platinum group metal), palladium (i.e., second platinum group metal), alumina (i.e., first oxidic support material), ceria-zirconia (i.e., a second oxidic support material), ceria (i.e., first oxygen storage compound), strontium oxide, lanthanum oxide and neodymium oxide (para 0123). Kumar then discloses dipping the outlet end in a second slurry and calcining to have a coating covering70 % of the axial length and containing platinum (i.e., fourth platinum group metal), rhodium (i.e., third platinum group metal), alumina (i.e., third oxidic support material), zirconia, and ceria-zirconia composite (para 0124). As the components are mixed and applied as a slurry the platinum group metals would be surrounding, and after calcination the platinum group metals would be supported on the oxidic materials. Kumar discloses that catalyst is used for treating exhaust from combustion engines (abstract, and paras 0002-0003), and the catalyst of Kumar would be capable of treating diesel exhaust. Regarding claim 4 The alumina can be both the oxidic support and the oxygen storage material. Regarding claim 10 Kumar discloses that the second slurry after calcining has 12.5 g/ft3 of rhodium and 10.5 g/ft3 of platinum (para 0124). Regarding claims 15-16 Kumar discloses that the exhaust gas stream is passed through the catalyst (para 0022). 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 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar et al. (EP-3170553-A2), as applied to claims 1-10 and 15-16 above. Regarding claims 11-12 Kumar discloses that it is known to have palladium (i.e., fifth platinum group metal) and silver supported on a zeolite material such as ZSM-5 (i.e., an MFI group zeolite) (para 0077). As such it would have been prima facie obvious to include the zeolite material in the first slurry. Regarding claims 13-14 Although Kumar is silent as to whether or not the platinum group metal is supported on the oxidic support material in the slurry, at some point the platinum group metal will be supported on the oxidic material, and it has been held that selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results, see MPEP 2144.04, section C, and also In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946), and In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES E MCDONOUGH whose telephone number is (571)272-6398. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10-10. 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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 5712721177. 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. JAMES E. MCDONOUGH Examiner Art Unit 1734 /JAMES E MCDONOUGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 26, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603189
DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR CLOSURE OF DEEP GEOLOGICAL NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL REPOSITORY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600672
DECARBONIZED CEMENT BLENDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590007
ZEOLITE NANOTUBES AND METHODS OF MAKING AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576482
POROUS COATED ABRASIVE ARTICLE AND METHOD OF MAKING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577160
AIR-DRY SCULPTURAL AND MODELING CLAY
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+11.0%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1425 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