Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/080,457

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR INCINERATING WASTE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 13, 2022
Priority
Dec 15, 2021 — DE DE102021006192.6
Examiner
LAUX, DAVID J
Art Unit
3762
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Martin GmbH Fur Umwelt- Und Energietechnik
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allowance Rate
552 granted / 848 resolved
-4.9% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+28.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
864
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
82.8%
+42.8% vs TC avg
§102
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§112
11.8%
-28.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 848 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Application Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is in response to Applicant’s submission dated 03/31/2026. Claim(s) 1–4, 6–14, 16–17 & 19–24 are pending. Election/Restrictions Based on the claims as amended, and pursuant to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 821.04(a), the restriction requirement as set forth in the Office action mailed on 12/03/2025, is hereby withdrawn and all claims are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or non-statutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1–4, 6–14, 16–17 & 19–24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Specifically, with regard to claims 1 & 19–20 the claim includes the limitation “…are adjusted to incineration properties in the secondary combustion zone” (line 11 in claims 1 & 19; lines 16–17 in claim 20); however, the term “incineration properties” are never defined in the Specification. As a result, one of ordinary skill in the art would not understand which properties are to be considered when adjusting the concentration of oxygen and carbon dioxide. Appropriate action is required. 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, 6–14, 16–17 & 19–24 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. Specifically, with regard to claims 1 & 19–20 the claim includes the limitation “…are adjusted to incineration properties in the secondary combustion zone” (line 11 in claims 1 & 19; lines 16–17 in claim 20); however, the term “incineration properties” are never defined in the Specification. As a result, one of ordinary skill in the art would not understand which properties are to be considered when adjusting the concentration of oxygen and carbon dioxide. Because the claim is indefinite, examination under §§ 102 & 103 is not possible at this time. Appropriate action is necessary. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: see attached PTO-892. Applicant is encouraged to review the cited references prior to submitting a response to this office action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J LAUX whose telephone number is (571)270-7619. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:30 M-F. 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, Helena Kosanovic, can be reached at (571) 272-9059. 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. /DAVID J LAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762 April 13, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 13, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12680222
LAUNDRY TREATING APPARATUS
4y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680697
Modified Burn Barrel Assembly
4y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680223
DRYER AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING SAME
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12677922
Attachment for Hair Care Appliance
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680692
COMBUSTION DEVICE AND BOILER
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+28.4%)
3y 2m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 848 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