Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/178,461

FILTER APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Mar 03, 2023
Examiner
FITZSIMMONS, ALLISON GIONTA
Art Unit
1773
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Fidica GmbH & Co. KG
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
64%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
288 granted / 608 resolved
-17.6% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
638
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
46.0%
+6.0% vs TC avg
§102
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§112
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 608 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 . 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 1-3 and 6-13 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 written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1: The amendments (filed 8/19/2025 and previously rejected on 9/15/2025, and now including “filter screen” filed 12/10/2025) “wherein an upper end of the filtrate riser tube is held in said inlet filter screen, which closes the container neck” and “wherein the inlet filter screen consists of a foamed material or filter fleece, through which the liquid can flow” are considered new matter. The new amendment of a inlet filter “screen” consisting of “a foamed material or filter fleece, through which the liquid can flow” is new matter. There is no explicit support for “inlet filter”. Based on the drawings, “inlet filter” was given support by the depiction of “5” which is described as an “upper filter screen” in the disclosure. However, there is no disclosure of the filter riser tube being “held” in the inlet filter, and that the inlet filter “closes the container neck”. Further, at best the upper filter is described as a “screen”. There is no support for the “upper filter” (aka inlet filter assumed) that “consists of a foamed material or filter fleece, through which the liquid can flow”. The fleece/foamed limitation is in the disclosure as describing a material on the “base of the container”. As such, there is no support for this material as being anywhere near the connector head or upper filter. See for example Claim 3 which still recites that the foam/fleece is on the base of the container. Claims 2-3 and 6-12 are rejected for their dependency on Claim 1. 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, 3, 7, 11, 12, and 13 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. Claim 1: “the liquid” in the last line of the claim lacks antecedent basis in the claim. Claim 3: “the entry” lacks antecedent basis in the claim. Claim 7: “the sealing position” lacks antecedent basis in the claim. Claim 7: “the lowered position” lacks antecedent basis in the claim. Claim 11: “the transverse bore” lacks antecedent basis in the claim. Claim 11: “the lowered position of the sealing piston” lacks antecedent basis in the claim. Claim 12: “the lowered position of the sealing piston” lacks antecedent basis in the claim. Claim 13: “the exterior” lacks antecedent basis in the claim. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “apparatus apparatus” in the preamble of Claim 1 appears to be improper. Appropriate correction is required. Allowable Subject Matter The content of Claims 1-3 and 6-13 is allowable if the 112, 1st and 2nd paragraph rejections can be overcome. However, any amendment to the claims will need to be reconsidered in view of the prior art and for 112 compliance. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that [0011-0012] of the published specs support the amendment of the filter screen consisting of a foamed material or filter fleece. The disclosure does not support the filtrate riser tube being "held in said inlet filter" or that the inlet filter "closes the container neck". The disclosure only recites that the filtrate riser tube is "held at the upper end region in the container connector head". The disclosure describes an "upper end" of the filtrate riser tube "connected in a locking manner (34) in the container connector head (2) and to grove (10).". This does not say that the tube is "held" in the inlet filter; the figure only supports that the tube passes through or extends through the inlet filter (5). There is also no disclosure for the inlet filter as closing the container neck. From the figures, the riser tube passes through the inlet filter (5). The neck, element 12, is not closed, but rather has the filtrate tube (3) pass through the filter to the bore (35) of the sealing piston. There is no disclosure of any element that "closes the container neck". Regarding the "inlet filter" and it's material, the disclosure describes the "filter screen" as being separate and distinct from the "foam material or filter fleece". See [0012] wherein the filter screen is provided to cover openings and prevent entry of the "filter medium" which is the "foam material or filter fleece". [0039] describes (5) as a filter screen. [0035] describes element (2) as the connector head. [0011] cited by Application in the publication states "Situated in the container connector head there is a foamed material or filter fleece" this is very different than describing the filter screen as being or consisting of a foamed material or filter fleece. The disclosure and figures clearly describe the "connector head" and "upper filter screen (5)" as different elements. In the figures, the connector head (2) is above the "upper filter screen". Support for the "foamed material or filter fleece" being "situated" in the connector head does not support the upper filter screen (.e. inlet filter) as consisting of a foamed material or filter fleece. It would also be appreciated by one of ordinary skill in the art that a foamed material or filter fleece would not be considered as the same structure or type of filter element as a "filter screen"; a screen versus a foam/fleece material typically have different structures. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLISON FITZSIMMONS whose telephone number is (571)270-1767. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am - 2:00 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, Benjamin Lebron can be reached at (571)272-0475. 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. ALLISON FITZSIMMONS Primary Examiner Art Unit 1773 /ALLISON G FITZSIMMONS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 03, 2023
Application Filed
May 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Aug 19, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 11, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Dec 10, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Apr 06, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600650
MULTI-STAGE APPARATUS FOR PRODUCING MAGNETIZED WATER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599857
Bacterial cellulose-based air filter mesh and use thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594514
NANOFIBER FOR AIR FILTER COMPRISING RANDOM COPOLYMER HAVING ZWITTERIONIC FUNCTIONAL GROUP AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12570561
DEVICE FOR DISTRIBUTING MINERALIZED WATER AND ASSOCIATED METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569790
ELEMENT OF, CARTRIDGE AND CONTAINER WITH, FILTER FOR SLURRY
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
47%
Grant Probability
64%
With Interview (+16.5%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 608 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