Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/163,973

REDUCED LOSS OF PRIME FOAM AT-A-DISTANCE DISPENSER SYSTEMS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 03, 2023
Examiner
CHEYNEY, CHARLES
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Gojo Industries Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allow Rate
436 granted / 777 resolved
-13.9% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+43.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
837
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.9%
+13.9% vs TC avg
§102
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
§112
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 777 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/28/2026 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the air and liquid inlets to mixing air chamber enter at a 180-degree angle to one another. However, the claim only requires that liquid path and air path at some point have an intersection of less than 90 degrees. Here, Li clearly teaches a part of the liquid path (at 85) that is less than 90 degrees to the part of the air path (74) (Depicted in Fig. 4), further there is nothing in the reference inhibiting first contact from taking place at the above location as air moves to fill the volume of the space its injected into (including the location at 72, or at 85 in Fig. 4). Further structural delineation of theses paths are needed to adequately define the claimed invention from the prior art of record. Election/Restrictions Claim 8 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species B and C , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/14/2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 9, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US Patent No. 8,955,719), and further in view of Renfrew (US 2013/0140331 A1). Re: Claim 1, Li discloses the claimed invention including a foam-at-a-distance soap or sanitizer dispenser (embodiment of Fig. 4, which includes the pump and valving structures of Fig. 1) comprising: a housing (3) (Fig. 1); a container (1) for holding a foamable liquid (Fig. 1); a pump (4) in fluid communication with the container (Fig. 1); the pump having an air pump chamber (51); an air pump chamber air inlet (52); an air pump chamber air inlet valve (52); an air pump chamber air outlet (53); an air pump chamber air outlet valve(53); a liquid pump chamber (42); a liquid pump chamber liquid inlet (46); a liquid pump chamber liquid inlet valve (46); a liquid pump chamber liquid outlet (41D); and a liquid pump chamber liquid outlet valve (41); and an air conduit (64); the air conduit extending from the air pump chamber air outlet to a remote mixing chamber (92) (Fig. 4); a liquid conduit (60) (Fig. 2A); the liquid conduit extending from the liquid pump chamber liquid outlet to the remote mixing chamber; wherein the remote mixing chamber is located at a distance from the air pump chamber air outlet and the liquid pump chamber liquid outlet and wherein the distance is greater than about 3 inches (Fig. 1 depicts a greater distance away from the outlets); an outlet nozzle (70) located proximate the remote mixing chamber (Fig. 4), and a mixing chamber housing, wherein the mixing chamber housing has a mixing chamber air inlet (74) and a mixing chamber liquid inlet (72) wherein a centerline of the mixing chamber liquid inlet and a centerline of the mixing chamber air inlet (Fig. 4); and wherein the mixing chamber is configured so that the liquid flows along a liquid path (81, and at 85) and the air flows along an air path (82) and wherein the liquid flowing along the liquid path and the air flowing along the air path first contact (at 81 or 85) each other at an angle that is less than 90 degrees (Fig. 4, at some point along the liquid path there is an intersection that is less than 90 degrees; first contact taking place at the above claimed location taught by Li as air moves to fill the volume of the space its injected into). except for a one-way check valve. However, Renfrew teaches a one-way liquid check valve (6) located proximate the remote mixing chamber (1) (Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a check valve as taught by Renfrew, since Renfrew states in para. 42 that such a modification prevents soap drips when not in use. Re: Claim 2, Li as modified by Renfrew in the rejection of claim 1 above discloses the claimed invention including the one-way liquid check valve is located less than about one inch from the mixing chamber (Renfrew: Depicted in Fig. 2). Re: Claim 3, Li as modified by Renfrew in the rejection of claim 1 above discloses the claimed invention including a mixing chamber housing, wherein the mixing chamber housing has a mixing chamber air inlet (12) and a mixing chamber liquid inlet (10), and wherein the one-way liquid check valve is located at least partially in the mixing chamber liquid inlet (Renfrew: Depicted in Fig. 2). Re: Claim 5, Li discloses the claimed invention including the liquid path and the air path intersect at an angle that is between about 45 degrees and less than 90 degrees (Fig. 4 depicts less than 90 degrees). Re: Claim 6, Li discloses the claimed invention including the liquid path and the air path intersect at an angle that is between about 75 degrees and less than 90 degrees(Fig. 4 depicts less than 90 degrees ). Re: Claim 7, Li discloses the claimed invention including the pump is located below the reservoir (Depicted in Fig. 1). Re: Claim 9, Li discloses the claimed invention including the housing comprises a base (2) and wherein the base is configured to sit on a counter top during use (Fig. 1). Re: Claim 16, Li discloses the claimed invention including a foam-at-a-distance table top soap or sanitizer dispenser (embodiment of Fig. 4, which includes the pump and valving structures of Fig. 1) comprising: a base (2) (Fig. 1); a housing (3) extending upward from the base (Depicted in Fig. 1 extending upward into the cantilevered portion); a pump (4) located in base (Fig. 1); the housing having a cantilevered portion extending outward the upward extending housing (Fig. 1 at nozzle (70); an outlet nozzle (70) located in the cantilevered portion of the housing (Fig. 1); a removable and replaceable reservoir (1) carried by the housing (Fig. 1); a remote mixing chamber (92) located by the outlet nozzle (Fig. 4); wherein the remote mixing chamber is located at least 3 inches from the pump (Fig. 1, at least 3 inches away); the mixing chamber having an air inlet (74), a liquid inlet (72) and a fluid outlet (77); an air conduit extending from the pump to the mixing chamber air inlet; a liquid conduit (60) extending from the pump to the liquid inlet, wherein a one-way liquid inlet valve (41) is located in a liquid flow path from the pump to the mixing chamber liquid inlet; and wherein the mixing chamber is configured so that liquid flows along a liquid path and air flows along an air path and the liquid path and the air path are at an angle of less than 90 degrees with respect to one another (Fig. 4); and Li discloses the claimed invention except for a one-way liquid inlet valve proximate the mixing chamber inlet. However, Renfrew teaches a one-way liquid inlet valve (6) located proximate the liquid inlet (Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a check valve as taught by Renfrew, since Renfrew states in para. 42 that such a modification prevents soap drips when not in use. Re: Claim 17, Li discloses the claimed invention including a mixing chamber housing (92) (Fig. 4). Re: Claim 18, Li as modified by Renfrew in the rejection of claim 1 above discloses the one-way liquid inlet valve (6) is located within the mixing chamber housing (3) (Renfrew: Depicted in Fig. 2). Re: Claim 19-20, Li in view of Renfrew depict a parallel orientation of the liquid path with respect to air path as seen in Fig. 2A and a less than perpendicular in Fig. 4), and in view of Renfrew show less than 90-degree orientation of the liquid inlet with respect to air inlet as seen in Fig. 2 except for expressly stating the degree. The Federal Circuit has held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A) (discussing Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984)). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Li in view of Renfrew by causing the angle between the liquid and air paths to be less than 30 degrees to parallel. Applicant appears to have placed no criticality on any particular angle (see Specification wherein a plurality of angles are given based on design choice) and it appears that the device of Li in view of Renfrew would work appropriately if made within the claimed range of angles. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES P. CHEYNEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9971. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 4:30 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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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. /CHARLES P. CHEYNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 03, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 18, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 26, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 28, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 20, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599687
Fluid Dispenser With UV Sanitation
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595104
CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594576
REMOVABLE CLOSURE CAP FOR CONTAINERS CONTAINING AIR-CURABLE MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583011
DRIVE MECHANISM AND VISCOUS MATERIAL DISPENSING GUN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569914
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING FLOW THROUGH A 3D PRINTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
56%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+43.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 777 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