Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/113,730

INTERSTITIALLY MIXED SELF-ASSEMBLED MONOLAYERS AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME BY RESEM

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Feb 24, 2023
Examiner
MAYY, MOHAMMAD
Art Unit
1718
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Korea University Research And Business Foundation
OA Round
2 (Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
55%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allow Rate
194 granted / 408 resolved
-17.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
440
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
58.6%
+18.6% vs TC avg
§102
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
§112
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 408 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 DETAILED ACTION Claim 8 new Claims 1-3 and 6-7 withdrawn Claims 4-5 and 8 pending Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude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 4-5, and 8 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. Claim 4 recites the limitation "the matrix" in page 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 4 states “ (i) forming a self-assembled monolayer (SAM) including a matrix molecule represented by the following [Formula 1] on a substrate using a solution of the matrix;”. However, it is unclear of the “matrix” is the same as the “matrix molecule” or not. Allowable Subject Matter The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of Buck (PG Pub 2007/0140901 A1) disclose the process of immersion a gold substrate in a solution having matrix molecule with substituted biphenyl group head and SH group as BP4 (4-(4′-Methyl-biphenyl-4-yl)-butane-1-thiol)[0045], and the formation of thermally treated BP4 and non-thermally treated PB4 [0047], formula 1. And the replacement of the non-thermally treated PB4 with MHA (ω-mercaptohexadecanoic acid) formula 2 by immersion [0049] with chemical formula of HS-(C15H30)COOH, with m = 15, as seen in fig. 6. Additionally, Buch disclose that the group head biphenyl is replaceable with another group head/moiety such as bipyridyl [0022], leading to having chemical formula as follow: HS-(C4H8)-methyl-bipyridyl, with n = 4. However, Buck does not disclose the n to be greater that m. Moreover, the formula 2 have carboxylic group instead of alkyl group, and without any repetition in the immersion steps. None of the prior art of record, suggest or disclose the claimed process of forming a mixed SAM by immersion of a solution having HS−(Cn H2n+1)−head group of formula 1 wherein the head group is a substituted or unsubstituted bipyridyl group, and then another solution having HS−(Cm H2m+1) of formula 2, and n>m, where those immersion steps are repeated k times where k>2, as claimed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, filed 02/09/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 4-5, 8 under 103a have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made of 112b, as shown above. The previously applied 112b claims rejection, in light of the amended claim are now withdrawn. However, in light of the currently amended claims, new 112b claim rejection are now applied. All other applicant arguments not specifically addressed above are deemed unpersuasive as either not commensurate in scope with the broadly drafted claims or are unsupported by factual evidence and are deemed mere attorney speculation. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Mohammad Mayy whose telephone number is (571)272-9983. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 11:00AM-7:00PM EST. 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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 571-272-5166. 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. /Mohammad Mayy/ Art Unit 1718 /GORDON BALDWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 24, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Feb 09, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Final Rejection — §112
Apr 07, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595551
METHOD FOR THE SURFACE TREATMENT OF PARTICLES OF A METAL POWDER AND METAL POWDER PARTICLES OBTAINED THEREBY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577732
METHOD OF MAKING FIRE RETARDANT MATERIALS AND RELATED PRODUCTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12546010
Turbine Engine Shaft Coating
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12546001
COMPOSITION FOR DEPOSITING A SILICON-CONTAINING LAYER AND METHOD OF DEPOSITING A SILICON-CONTAINING LAYER USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12533729
REACTIVE METAL POWDERS IN-FLIGHT HEAT TREATMENT PROCESSES
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
48%
Grant Probability
55%
With Interview (+7.8%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 408 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