Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/112,076

SOAP RECYCLING APPARATUS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Feb 21, 2023
Examiner
OGDEN JR, NECHOLUS
Art Unit
1761
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
714 granted / 1026 resolved
+4.6% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
1068
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
49.1%
+9.1% vs TC avg
§102
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.4%
-23.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1026 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
Response to Amendment 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 Interpretation The broadest and most reasonable interpretation of the claimed invention is interpreted as: A soap recycling apparatus having a defined housing that has an integrated mold within said housing, lid; and an activated heating element within said mold to meld the soap remnants that are recycled and molded into bar form. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 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. Claim(s) 1-10, 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Hudson (2023/0357676). Hudson discloses A soap bar molding device for molding recycled soap bars includes a housing having a top surface and a bottom surface. Additionally, the housing has a front surface, a back surface, and an interior. A bottom plate is positioned on the top surface of the house and protruding inward therefrom. The bottom plate holds a plurality of soap pieces. An interior surface of a cover is positioned upon the top surface of the housing. a top plate is positioned on the interior surface of the cover. An exterior surface of the cover has a dish defining a space to hold a bar of soap. A power source is positioned within the interior of the housing. A button is positioned on the front surface of the housing and provides electric current from the power source to the bottom plate and the top plate wherein the bottom and top plates generate heat (abstract). Specifically, Hudson teaches as best illustrated in FIGS. 1 through 6, the soap bar molding device 10 generally comprises a housing 12. The housing 12 has a top surface 14 and a bottom surface 16. In addition, the housing 12 has a front surface 18 and a back surface 20. The housing 12 also has a left surface 22 and a right surface 24. The front 18 and back 20 surfaces are positioned perpendicular relative to the left 22 and right 24 surfaces. Furthermore, the top 14 and bottom 16 surfaces are positioned parallel relative to each other and perpendicular relative to the front 18 and back 20 surfaces. The arrangement of the surfaces of the housing 12 creates an interior 26 within the housing 12. The interior 26 defines a space for a variety of elements to be positioned within (0014). The top surface 14 of the housing 12 has a front edge 30 and a back edge 32. Positioned between the front 30 and back 32 edges is a bottom plate 34. The bottom plate 34 protrudes inward and has a concave shape. The bottom plate 34 is configured for holding a plurality of soap pieces 36. Furthermore, an interior surface 38 of a cover/lid 40 is configured for being positioned upon the top surface 14 of the housing 12. A top plate 42 is positioned on the interior surface 38 of the cover 40. The top plate 42 is complementary to the bottom plate 34 of the housing 12, thus the top plate 42 assists in holding the plurality of soap pieces 36 within the bottom plate 34 (0015). A rear edge 44 of the interior surface 38 of the cover 40 is coupled to the back edge 32 of the top surface 14 of the housing 12 by a hinge 46. The hinge 46 is configured for positioning the cover 40 in an open and closed position relative to the housing 12. Additionally, an exterior surface 48 of the cover 40 has a dish 50. The dish 50 defines a space to hold a bar of soap. The dish 50 has an oval shape and can hold an existing bar of soap, or the dish 50 can hold a bar of soap formed from the bottom 34 and top plates 42 of the housing 12. A power source 52 is positioned within the interior 26 of the housing 12. The power source 52 is rechargeable and is in electric communication with a universal serial bus port 54. The universal serial bus port 54 is positioned on the back surface 20 of the housing 12. A cord 56 is configured for providing electricity to the power source 52. The cord 56 has a universal serial bus input 58 configured for being inserted into the universal serial bus port 54. The cord 56 can also have an outlet plug to receive the electric current from a power outlet. A compartment 60 is positioned on the bottom surface 16 of the housing 12 and is configured for storing the cord 56 within when the cord 56 is un-used. The compartment 60 has a door 62 configured for enclosing the compartment 60 (0015-0017). See figures 1, 2, 4 and claims. As this reference teach all of the instantly required it is considered anticipatory. In the alternative, the battery limitation is not explicitly called out but inferred as the “rechargeable power source” would have been an obvious variation of the same component given that one skilled in the art would have envisioned the similarity of rechargeable power source is synonymous with the battery limitation as well known in the electrical art and utilized in a similar fashion within the soap apparatus of Hudson. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 10-16-2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Hudson teaches away from the amended limitation of requiring a lid having an insertion portion complementary in shape to the open top of the mold. Furthermore, the insertion portion extends through the open top of the mold to secure the lid in the closed position. The examiner respectfully disagrees and directs applicant’s rep. to figures 1 and 2 of Hudson as set forth above, which anticipate the claimed invention. Hudson teaches the amended limitations of: Providing an interior surface 38 of a cover/lid 40 is configured for being positioned upon the top surface 14 of the housing 12. A top plate 42 is positioned on the interior surface 38 of the cover 40. The top plate 42 is complementary to the bottom plate 34 of the housing 12, thus the top plate 42 assists in holding the plurality of soap pieces 36 within the bottom plate 34 (0015; figures 1 and 2). The claims are set forth in Hudson, which clearly does not teach away but describes the soap apparatus and its amended limitations where the skilled artisan would envision the claimed recycled soap bar apparatus in light of the specificity of the teachings and drawings of Hudson. 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 NECHOLUS OGDEN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-1322. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 EST 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-1498. 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. /NECHOLUS OGDEN JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 21, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Oct 16, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595435
DETERGENT COMPOSITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576019
PERSONAL CLEANSING COMPOSITION WITH AN ORGANIC ACID HAVING A PKA GREATER THAN 2.7
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577502
USE OF PROPOXYLATED SURFACTANT OR POLYMER IN FOAMING APPLICATIONS TO CONTROL VISCOELASTICITY IN HIGHLY ACTIVE LIQUID FORMULATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576013
DISSOLVABLE SOLID FIBROUS SHAMPOO ARTICLES CONTAINING SALTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564549
CLEANSER COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+23.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1026 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month