Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/141,806

DISPENSING CAPSULE AND METHOD AND APPARATUS OF FORMING SAME

Final Rejection §112
Filed
May 01, 2023
Priority
Sep 14, 2016 — AU 2016903695 +2 more
Examiner
FORTUNA, JOSE A
Art Unit
1748
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
VARDEN PROCESS PTY LTD
OA Round
2 (Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
1062 granted / 1336 resolved
+14.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
1366
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.6%
-20.4% vs TC avg
§112
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1336 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 . Election/Restrictions Newly submitted claims 8-20 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: the product can be made by a materially different process, such as thermoforming. Note also that the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 8-20 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03. To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention. Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention. 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 1-6 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. In claim 1, the phrase “the coffee brewing machine” on the last line of the paragraph starting with “in a second toolset…” lacks antecedent basis. Response to Arguments Applicants’ arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-6 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not teach nor fairly suggest inter alia a process of making a capsule where a pulp slurry is drawing to a mesh using vacuum and deforming the draw slurry by pressing in such a way that such that the deformation of each of the one or more preform shapes in the pulp fibre mat by the second toolset involves decreasing the wall thickness of each of the one or more preform shapes in a part of each of the one or more preform shapes that forms a piercing area in the body, wherein the piercing area has increased fibre compression and a thinner wall section, compared with the body surrounding the piercing area, and wherein the piercing area is to be pierced by the piercing head within a coffee brewing machine, as claimed. Conclusion Applicants’ 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 JOSE A FORTUNA whose telephone number is (571)272-1188. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY- FRIDAY 11:30 PM- 9:00 PM. 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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 571-270-7457. 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. /JOSE A FORTUNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748 JAF
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 01, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Aug 12, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 27, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12747536
MOISTURE/OIL RESISTANT COMPOSITE MATERIALS
1y 11m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12735844
COATED PAPER FOR USE AS PACKAGING MATERIAL
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12723354
SOFT TREATED TISSUE PRODUCT
2y 0m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12723353
CREPED TISSUE PRODUCTS HAVING A MACHINE DIRECTION ORIENTED PATTERN
2y 1m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12716176
Assymetric Paperboard
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+9.9%)
2y 3m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1336 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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