Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/081,755

DEVICE AND METHOD FOR STORAGE TRANSPORTATION AND RELEASE OF FRAGILE INSECTS AND OTHER FRAGILE ITEMS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 15, 2022
Examiner
NGUYEN, SON T
Art Unit
3643
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Senecio Ltd.
OA Round
6 (Non-Final)
29%
Grant Probability
At Risk
6-7
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
45%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 29% of cases
29%
Career Allow Rate
331 granted / 1154 resolved
-23.3% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
1204
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
48.2%
+8.2% vs TC avg
§102
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
§112
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1154 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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 1-4,6,10-12,14,15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andreev et al. (US 3893420 A) in view of Dollansky et al. (WO 2009067089 A1). For claim 1, Andreev et al. teach a fragile insect storage device for storage of insects, the insects being fragile insects, the device comprising: at least one hatching compartment (interior of ref. 1), the hatching compartment comprising at least one pupa emergence or hatching element (the barley, maize, etc. for the eggs to thrive and hatch into adults) from which adult insects may emerge; an open region (duct 2) connected to an air pressure source (air pump of conditioner 3), the open region and the air pressure source together being configured for streaming of an adult insect bearing airflow within said open region (as stated: “As moths accumulate in the insect duct 2, an air pump of a conditioner 3 is actuated by a command sent from a control panel 10 and the whole bulk of the moth imagos are carried with a current of air into a collector 4 for collecting the imagos and their eggs.”); at least one adult insect storage cartridge (4) at an end of said open region, the adult insect storage cartridge and the air pressure source being positioned respective to each other and to said storage compartment such that said adult insect bearing air flow being streamed across said open region is in a direction to carry said emerging adult insects from said at least one hatching compartment towards said at least one adult insect storage cartridge (as stated in the above excerpt). However, Andreev et al. are silent about at least one sensor located at a passageway connecting said open region to said at least one adult insect storage cartridge, the at least one sensor located to identify at least one member of a group of sensing data comprising movement and positioning of said emerging adult insects in said air flow in respect of said at least one adult insect storage cartridge, the device configured to obtain from said sensor an indication when said storage cartridge is full, and said at least one adult insect storage cartridge is configured to be disconnected when said indication is provided. Dollansky et al. teach a fragile insect storage device for storage of insects, the insects being fragile insects, the device comprising: at least one sensor (pages 36,45,59,60 teach optical and level sensors being placed in various location in the system; for example, excerpt stated: “The level sensor 711 sends a signal via the connection 753 to the system controller 260 when the container 710 is nearly full. The level sensor 712 sends a signal via the connection 754 to the system controller 260 when liquid level in the container 710 becomes so low that reducing the liquid level further would also remove eggs from the container 710.”), the at least one sensor (the optical sensor sends images to the controller for status of the pupae in the pipe, thus, it is implied that at least one of movement and positioning are identify in order to know where the pupae are) located to identify at least one member of a group of sensing data comprising movement and positioning of said emerging adult insects, the device configured to obtain from said sensor an indication when said storage cartridge is full (as stated in the excerpt above), and said at least one adult insect storage cartridge is configured to be disconnected when said indication is provided (implied since that is the operation of a sensor that detects full and sends the signal to the controller to stop or disconnect operation because the device is full). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include at least one sensor that detects movement and positioning of the emerging adult insects, and also have the device be configured to obtain from the sensor an indication of full as taught by Dollansky et al. in the device of Andreev et al. in order to alert the controller to stop operation if the device is full and to monitor where the insects are located within the device. The combination of Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. would result in the at least one sensor (as modified with Dollansky et al.) located at the passageway connecting said open region to said at least one adult insect storage cartridge (Dollansky et al. teach the sensors being placed in passageways in between parts of the device, thus, the same locations of the sensors would be applied to Andreev et al.’s device in the passageway of the open region in insect duct 2 and storage cartridge 4), the at least one sensor located to identify at least one member of a group of sensing data comprising movement and positioning of said emerging adult insects in said air flow in respect of said at least one adult insect storage cartridge, the device configured to obtain from said sensor an indication when said storage cartridge is full (note that this limitation is merely a functional recitation of the device being configured to obtain, thus, the controller in Andreev et al. with modification from Dollansky et al. would be able to perform the intended function since the sensors from Dollansky et al. will be incorporated in the device of Andreev et al.), and said at least one adult insect storage cartridge is configured to be disconnected when said indication is provided. For claim 2, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 1, and further teach wherein said open region is configured such that said airflow is constant (functional recitation to which the opening region of Andreev et al. can perform the intended function if the airflow from the air pump is constant because it is an open region). For claim 3, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 2, and further teach wherein said open region is configured such that said airflow provides a gradually decreasing temperature (functional recitation to which the opening region of Andreev et al. can perform the intended function if the airflow from the air pump decreases gradually in temperature because it is an open region). For claim 4, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 1, and further teach the device is configured to be suitable for live insects (Andreev et al. teach live moths being raised in the device; also, Dollansky et al. teach live insects in their device). For claim 6, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 1, and further teach wherein said at least one adult insect storage cartridge is configured to be loaded into a release system (Andreev et al. stated that the insects inside cartridge 4 will be release into areas under agricultural plants, thus, it is implied that there is a release system; excerpt stated: “The marks are necessary for further standardizing of trichogramma release into areas under agricultural plants in order to protect them from pests.” ; also, claim 3). For claim 10, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 1, but are silent about wherein said at least one pupa emergence or hatching element comprises liquid containers respectively for holding pupae in water. In addition to the above, Dollansky et al. teach at least one pupa emergence or hatching element comprises liquid containers (710,810,1000, or 1100) respectively for holding pupae in water. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the at least one pupa emergence or hatching element of Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. be comprised of liquid containers respectively for holding pupae in water as further taught by Dollansky et al., depending on what type of insects the user wishes to raise. For example, Dollansky et al. wish to raise mosquitos so these insects would be raised in liquid or water. For claim 11, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 10, but are silent about wherein said at least one pupa emergence or hatching element respectively comprises a drain opening for draining said water after emergence from said pupae. In addition to the above, Dollansky et al. teach said at least one pupa emergence or hatching element respectively comprises a drain opening (225,226,713,815,1006,1102,1103) for draining said water after emergence from said pupae. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a drain opening as further taught by Dollansky et al. in the at least one pupa emergence or hatching element of Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. in order to drain the water for either recycling or for new fresh water for the next batch of insects. For claim 12, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 1, but are silent about the device configured to be suitable for flies or mosquitoes. In addition to the above, Dollansky et al. teach the device being configured to be suitable for flies or mosquitoes. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the device of Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. so as to be suitable for flies or mosquitoes as further taught by Dollansky et al. in order to allow the user the option of raising flies or mosquitoes. For claim 14, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 1, and further teach wherein said at least one sensor comprises a plurality of sensors (as modified with Dollansky et al. in the above). For claim 15, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 14, and further teach wherein said plurality of sensors are located at a plurality of insect passages respectively (as modified with Dollansky et al. in the above). Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Arsiwalla et al. (US 20160066552 A1). For claim 13, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 1, but are silent about wherein said at least one sensor comprises an IR sensor or a laser sensor. Arsiwalla et al. teach a fragile insect storage device for storage of insects comprising at least one sensor, the sensor being an IR sensor or a laser sensor (para. 0019) for monitoring the insects. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use either an IR sensor or a laser sensor as taught by Arsiwalla et al. as the preferred sensor in the system of Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al., depending on the user’s preference to select known sensors in the market for monitoring the insects in the system. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Robinson (US 20110132278 A1). For claim 16, Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. teach the device of claim 1, but are silent about wherein said at least one adult insect storage cartridge comprises a plurality of adult insect storage cartridges, each adult insect storage cartridge connected via a respective passageway to said open region. Robinson teaches a fragile insect storage device for storage of insects comprising at least one storage cartridge (180) comprises a plurality of storage cartridges (para. 0016, multi-compartmented cartridge), each storage cartridge connected via a respective passageway (the open top area as shown in fig. 2; also, para. 0016 stated that the whole cartridge has cooling air through the entire interior) to said open region. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the at least one adult insect storage cartridge of Andreev et al. as modified by Dollansky et al. be comprised of a plurality of adult insect storage cartridges, each adult insect storage cartridge connected via a respective passageway to said open region as taught by Robinson in order to store different species of insects and not intermixed them. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4,6,10-16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SON T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6889. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 to 4:00. 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, Peter Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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. /Son T Nguyen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 15, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 24, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 27, 2023
Response Filed
Aug 03, 2023
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 11, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 12, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 25, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 01, 2024
Response Filed
Jul 12, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 17, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 28, 2025
Notice of Allowance
Dec 29, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582094
Equine Boot
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12568928
COVER FOR A CAGE FOR LABORATORY ANIMALS, AND CAGE FOR LABORATORY ANIMALS INCLUDING SAID COVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12550865
ANIMAL LITTERS EXHIBITING REDUCED ADHESION PROPERTIES, AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12538895
Apparatus and method for maintaining pet waste
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12532863
PROTECTOR WORN ON A HORSE LEG
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
29%
Grant Probability
45%
With Interview (+16.7%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1154 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