Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/043,250

CONTAINER CLOSURE INCLUDING VORTEX-GENERATING FEATURE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 27, 2023
Examiner
SMYTH, ANDREW P
Art Unit
2878
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Curium US LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
616 granted / 856 resolved
+4.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
868
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
59.5%
+19.5% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
12.8%
-27.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 856 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 . DETAILED ACTION Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claim(s) 10-20, in the reply filed on 3/13/2026 is acknowledged. 2. Claim(s) 10-20 will be examined. Claim(s) 1-9 are withdrawn. 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. 2. Claim(s) 10-11, 13-14, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over OHNUKI et al. (US 20100012278 A1) in view of SPENCE et al. (US 8030080 B2). Regarding claim 10, OHNUKI discloses a system comprising: a a container (figs. 1-3; 1, 2, 3) positioned within an interior of the a closure (3) connected to the container (2) and comprising a body (3) comprising an outlet flow path (3a) and at least one inlet flow path (3b, 3d) ; an evaporation station (14) positioned within the interior of the a gas handling system (13, 12, 15, 11) comprising a suction line (13, 12) [0071] connected to an outlet (3a) of the outlet flow path, wherein the at least one inlet flow path (3b, 3d) generates a vortex gas flow (fig. 2, vortex/spiral arrows) (abstract) [0071] within the container when suction is applied to the container by the suction line (13, 12) . But OHNUKI fails to disclose a radiation containment chamber; and a remote manipulator connected to the radiation containment chamber. SPENCE, however, discloses a radiation containment chamber (figs. 1-3; 10) (col. 32, lines 35-40) (col. 33, lines 55-60); and a remote manipulator (20, 230) connected to the radiation containment chamber (10); and a container (12) positioned within an interior of the radiation containment chamber (10); (figs. 1-3; 10) (col. 32, lines 35-40) (col. 33, lines 55-60). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of OHNUKI, with a radiation containment chamber; and a remote manipulator connected to the radiation containment chamber, as taught by SPENCE, to use for transferring hazardous radioactive liquids to prevent harmful exposure to an operator. Regarding claim 17, OHNUKI discloses a method comprising: providing, within a a container (1, 2, 3) having a a closure (3) to the container (2) such that the closure seals against the container, wherein the closure includes at least one inlet flow path (3b, 3d) and an outlet flow path (3a); and directing (13, 12, 15, 11) [0071] a flow of gas through the at least one inlet flow path (3b, 3d) of the closure to generate a vortex gas flow (fig. 2, vortex/spiral arrows) (abstract) [0071] within the container. But OHNUKI fails to disclose within a radiation containment chamber, a container having a radioactive liquid disposed therein; and connecting, using a remote manipulator. SPENCE, however, discloses a radiation containment chamber (figs. 1-3; 10) (col. 32, lines 35-40) (col. 33, lines 55-60); and a remote manipulator (20, 230) connected to the radiation containment chamber (10); and a container (12) positioned within an interior of the radiation containment chamber (10) and that the container (12) having a radioactive liquid disposed therein (figs. 1-3; 10) (col. 32, lines 35-40) (col. 33, lines 55-60). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of OHNUKI, with a radiation containment chamber with a remote manipulator connected to the radiation containment chamber and the container having a radioactive liquid disposed therein, as taught by SPENCE, to use for transferring hazardous radioactive liquids to prevent harmful exposure to an operator. Moreover, regarding claim(s) 11, SPENCE discloses wherein the container (12) has a radioactive liquid (col. 32, lines 35-40) (col. 33, lines 55-60) disposed therein; and is obvious for the reasons discussed supra with reference to claim(s) 1, see previous. Moreover, regarding claim(s) 13, SPENCE discloses wherein the remote manipulator (20, 230) is a telemanipulator (col. 12, lines 50-55) (col. 15, lines 20-25); and is obvious for the reasons discussed supra with reference to claim(s) 1 and/or 17, see previous. Moreover, regarding claim(s) 14, SPENCE discloses wherein the telemanipulator (20, 230) includes: an operator controller (60) (col. 12, lines 50-55) (col. 15, lines 20-25) positioned outside of the radiation containment chamber (fig 3; 10); and an end effector (210, 230) positioned within the radiation containment chamber (10), wherein the operator controller controls at least one of a position, an orientation, and a state of the end effector (col. 17, lines 53-55) (col. 18, lines 40-45); and is obvious for the reasons discussed supra with reference to claim(s) 1, see previous. Regarding claim 18, OHNUKI discloses heating (fig. 3, 14) the (in 2). But OHNUKI fails to disclose a container having a radioactive liquid disposed therein. SPENCE, however, discloses a radiation containment chamber (figs. 1-3; 10) (col. 32, lines 35-40) (col. 33, lines 55-60); and a remote manipulator (20, 230) connected to the radiation containment chamber (10); and a container (12) positioned within an interior of the radiation containment chamber (10) and that the container (12) having a radioactive liquid disposed therein; and a heater (30) (col. 12, lines 25-30). (figs. 1-3; 10) (col. 32, lines 35-40) (col. 33, lines 55-60) (col. 12, lines 25-30) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of OHNUKI, with a container having a radioactive liquid disposed therein, as taught by SPENCE, to use for transferring hazardous radioactive liquids to prevent harmful exposure to an operator. 2. Claim(s) 12 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over OHNUKI et al. (US 20100012278 A1) in view of SPENCE et al. (US 8030080 B2) ;hereinafter “the combined references”, as applied to claim 1 and 17 above, and further in light of MANNING et al. (US 20200316230 A1). Regarding claim(s) 12 AND 20, the combined references disclose the elements of claim 1 AND 17, see previous. But the combined references fail to disclose wherein the radioactive liquid [0003] comprises one of a radionuclide precursor solution and a radiolabeled compound; AND wherein the radioactive liquid is a radiolabeled compound. MANNING, however, discloses radiopharmaceutical compounds that are radioactive liquid that comprises a radiolabeled compound [0073] [0147] 9abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine/modify the invention of the combined references, with radioactive liquid that comprises a radiolabeled compound, as taught by MANNING, to use as a substitution of one known radiolabeled compound for another radioactive liquid to obtain predictable radiotracer production and utilization results. 2. Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over OHNUKI et al. (US 20100012278 A1) in view of SPENCE et al. (US 8030080 B2); hereinafter “the combined references”, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in light of HOOVEN et al. (EP 3682920 B1). Regarding claim(s) 15 , OHNUKI discloses wherein the body (figs. 1-3; 3) extends longitudinally along a central longitudinal axis from a first, upper surface to a second, lower surface (of 3 in 2), wherein the body (3) defines a cavity (of 3a and/or 3b, 3c, 3d) extending into the body (of 3) from the lower surface to a third, interior surface (of 3d and/or inner of 3a) , But the combined references fail to disclose a cavity extending into the body from the lower surface to a third, interior surface, the cavity sized and shaped to receive a portion of the container. HOOVEN, however, discloses a container (figs. 80-81, 12) with an inlet and outlet (21 with 36, 37) and a body (3) that has a cavity (of 29) extending into the body (of 3) from the lower surface to a third, interior surface (where 12 rests in 29), the cavity sized and shaped to receive a portion of the container (12) therein, wherein each of the outlet flow path (21, 37) and the at least one inlet flow path (21, 36) is in fluid communication with the cavity (21 in 29). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine/modify the invention of the combined references, with the above claimed body cavity for receiving the container, as taught by HOOVEN, to use as a known transfer apparatus configuration for receiving and holding a container in position for fluid transfer. Moreover, regarding claim(s) 16, HOOVEN discloses wherein the body further includes: a shroud (walls of cavity 29) extending from the interior surface to the lower surface; and a container (21) insert depending from the interior surface and positioned within the cavity (29), the container insert (21) sized and shaped to fit within an opening of the container (12) [0132]. ; and is obvious for the reasons discussed supra with reference to claim(s) , see previous. 2. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over OHNUKI et al. (US 20100012278 A1) in view of SPENCE et al. (US 8030080 B2) ;hereinafter “the combined references”, as applied to claim 17 above, and further in light of FUGAZZA et al. (US 20200131224 A1). Regarding claim(s) 19, the combined references disclose the elements of claim 17, see previous. But the combined references fail to disclose wherein the radioactive liquid is a radionuclide precursor solution. FUGAZZA, however, discloses synthesis of radionuclide complex solutions, for their use in the commercial production of radioactive drug substances via providing a radionuclide precursor solution into a first vial (ABSTRACT). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine/modify the invention of the combined references, with radioactive liquid is a radionuclide precursor solution, as taught by FUGAZZA, to use as a substitution of one known solution (i.e. radionuclide precursor solution) for another radioactive liquid to obtain predictable results of commercial production of radioactive drug substances (abstract). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrew Smyth whose telephone number is 571-270-1746. The examiner can normally be reached between 9:00AM - 6:00PM; Monday thru Friday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Georgia Epps can be reached on (571) 272-2328. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ANDREW SMYTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 27, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599688
ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT DECONTAMINATION ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601515
Air Evacuator
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592371
NON-INTRUSIVE LASER-BASED TECHNIQUE FOR MONITOR AND CONTROL OF PROTEIN DENATURATION ON SURFACES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582739
UVC AIR DISINFECTION DEVICE WITH LED THERMAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12560413
Device, System, and Method of Aircraft Protection and Countermeasures Against Missiles
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+14.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 856 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