Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/115,599

Methods and Systems for Sluicing Radionuclides from Resin Packed Columns

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Feb 28, 2023
Examiner
FIGUEROA, JOHN J
Art Unit
1763
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Shine Technologies LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
902 granted / 1087 resolved
+18.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
1111
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
36.6%
-3.4% vs TC avg
§102
31.9%
-8.1% vs TC avg
§112
13.8%
-26.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1087 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Election/Restriction Applicant’s election, without traverse, of Group I (claims 1-13) in the reply filed on December 2, 2025, to the restriction requirement dated October 3, 2025, is hereby acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 1-13 have been examined in the instant Office action whereas claims 14-20 have been withdrawn from consideration as drawn to a nonelected invention but remain pending with the present application. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp Claims 1-13 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting (‘ODP’) as unpatentable over claims 1-11 and 13-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,567,510 B2 (‘510 patent), which issued July 15, 2025. Examiner notes that Applicant did not provide a definition for the term “sluicing” in the present specification. Therefore, examiner is according the term “sluicing” its broadest reasonable interpretation as providing a fluid, such as water, to wash, rinse or separate solids from a liquid/stream. Present independent claim 1 is not identical to independent claim 1 of the ‘510 patent in that the method of present independent claim 1 recites including a “sluicing preparation tank [that] is fluidly coupled to [a] anion exchange column,” whereas the method of claim 1 of the ‘510 patent is drawn a method of nuclide waste extraction that comprises a column effluent tank “fluidly” connected to an anion exchange resin housed in an adsorption column. However, the two sets of claims are not patentably distinct from each other because they are both drawn to a method of radionuclide waste extraction that comprises: directing a waste stream from an upstream segment of a main waste pathway into a stream input of an anion exchange column, wherein the waste stream comprises uranium/radionuclides; the anion exchange column houses an anion exchange resin; a cation exchange column housing a cation exchange resin that is fluidly coupled to the anion exchange column and positioned downstream from the anion exchange column and a sluicing preparation tank (“effluent tank”) that is fluidly coupled to the anion exchange column; adsorbing uranium from the waste stream onto an anion exchange resin housed in the column; directing the waste stream from the anion exchange column into the cation exchange column; adsorbing nuclides onto a cation exchange resin housed in the column; removing spent anion exchange resin from the anion exchange column; and directing fresh anion exchange resin from the sluicing/effluent tank into the anion exchange column. Thus, the instant claims are unpatentable under ODP over claims of the ‘510 patent. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The closest cited prior art aside from the ‘510 patent discussed, supra, is Strohmer (US 2018/0308597 A1 to Strohmer et al., published Oct 25, 2018). This reference discloses a method for recovering radioactive nuclides from a stream of waste using a process that includes adding an organic acid or alkaline compound to form a solution, and separate the radionuclide from the process solution. However, the method in Strohmer includes separating the radionuclide from the process solution using a reaction specific to the radioisotope. See, for example, abstract and claim 1 of Strohmer. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN J FIGUEROA whose telephone number is (571)272-8916. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am -6:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JOSEPH DEL SOLE can be reached on 571-272-1130. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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. 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. /JOHN J FIGUEROA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763 March 21, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 28, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599800
PROCESSES FOR REMOVING PERFLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES AND REGENERATING AN ADSORBENT USED WITH SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599867
Fully Automated Direct Air Capture Carbon Dioxide Processing System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595186
Method for Preparing Cuprous Chloride by High-value Utilization of Chloride Ion-containing Wasterwater
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590241
MODIFIED SILICA NANOPARTICLE AND METHODS OF SYNTHESIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583742
Hydrogen Production and Carbon Sequestration via High Temperature Cracking of Natural Gas In An Inductively Heated Fluidized Carbon Particle Bed
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
83%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+8.7%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1087 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