Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/129,110

Entropy reduction instrument

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 31, 2023
Examiner
FAIRCHILD, MALLIKA DIPAYAN
Art Unit
3792
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Sichuan Zhonggu Jiuhe Medical Equipment Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
641 granted / 807 resolved
+9.4% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
846
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.1%
-31.9% vs TC avg
§103
35.4%
-4.6% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 807 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Amendment This action is in response to the Amendment filed on 9/9/2025. Claims 1-8 are pending. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-8 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as necessitated by the amendments. Claim Rejections-35 USC 112 and 35 U.S.C. 101 Applicant argues that the amendments, as recited provide sufficient structure for the separator, and by means of the configuration of the separator, an energy component capable of reducing entropy can be separated from the electrical energy. The energy component is then processed by the electrode plate assembly to generate an emission energy to be applied to the subject, so as to drive an entropy reduction in the subject. Cellular senescence is a process involving the entropy increase. By applying the emission energy output from the instrument claimed herein, the entropy increase inside the cells can be alleviated, and thus the cellular senescence is delayed. Applicant’s amendments and arguments have been considered however upon further search and consideration, the claims are now rejected as discussed in the current office action. Claim Objections Claims 1 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 1, lines 16 and 20 recite “negentropy separator” and should be amended to recite “separator”. In claim 7, line 3 recites “negentropy bridge module” and should be amended to remove the word “negentropy”. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-8 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 enablement requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. While the claims and specifications discuss a structure for the separator that is used to separate the “energy component capable of reducing entropy”, they do not reasonably provide disclosure for what this energy component is and how the energy component is separated. The disclosure fails to state or teach one of ordinary skill in the art the exact way to determine how this separator can be used to separate this energy component generated by a battery and processed by an electrode assembly to be applied to a human body. Without this disclosure, one skilled in the art cannot practice the invention without undue experimentation because of the number of operational parameters in the process/apparatus. Due to the lack of an enabling specification, several questions arise as to how to make and/or use the invention, such as: What is “an energy component capable of reducing entropy”? How does passing the energy generated by a battery through three water filled concentric tubular tanks and a connecting rod with a magnetic ring separate this component? Copper and water are conductors and so how is this energy from the battery separated by a conductive configuration such as this separator and then processed by the electrodes to generate an “emission energy” to be applied to a human body? Electrodes are basically pieces of metal and so what is the processing performed by electrodes? What does the magnetic ring sleeved around the copper tank do? What are the parameters of the energy generated by the battery and are they some specific values so that the energy generated by the battery has an energy component capable of reducing entropy? What are the parameters of the emission energy that is “processed” by the electrode plate assembly applied to the human body? Since there are numerous questions as to how the invention is made and/or used, since no amount of direction or guidance was presented, and/or since one skilled in the art cannot practice the invention without undue experimentation (as seen by the above questions) because of the number of operational parameters in the process/apparatus that are needed to generate energy and “separate the energy component capable of reducing entropy”, one skilled in the art to which it pertains is not enabled to make and/or use the invention of the subject matter presented in the claims. The dependent claims inherit the deficiencies. 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 1-8 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. Independent claim 1 recites that the energy component is capable of reducing entropy. The recitation raises questions as to the entropy of what is being reduced. Clim 1 also recites that the magnetic ring is sleeved on an outer periphery of the tank. It is unclear as to where the magnetic ring is “sleeved” – on an outer periphery of which tank, the first or second or the third tank or the entire assembly? Further what does the connecting rod in the separator connect to? The dependent claims inherit the deficiencies While no prior art rejection has been applied, the claims cannot be indicated as allowable due to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112 as discussed above. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 MALLIKA DIPAYAN FAIRCHILD whose telephone number is (571)270-7043. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8 am-5pm 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, BENJAMIN KLEIN can be reached at 571-270-5213. 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. /MALLIKA D FAIRCHILD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 31, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Sep 09, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599758
INTRAVASCULAR BLOOD PUMPS, MOTORS, AND FLUID CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594419
IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL DEVICE LEAD WITH MODULAR ELECTRODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589234
INTRAVASCULAR BLOOD PUMPS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582826
Intra-Body Network System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576272
ENGAGEMENT COMPONENT SELECTION FOR CONTROL OF BIO-PSYCHIATRIC THERAPEUTIC TRAJECTORY (BTT)
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
79%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+18.5%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 807 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