Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/191,657

METHOD OF PACKAGING AND DESIGNING BRAGG GRATING OPTICAL FIBER SYSTEM FOR SENSING CARBON DIOXIDE

Non-Final OA §103§DP
Filed
Mar 28, 2023
Examiner
LAWRENCE JR, FRANK M
Art Unit
1776
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
BAKER HUGHES OILFIELD OPERATIONS LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
1172 granted / 1399 resolved
+18.8% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1433
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§102
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
§112
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1399 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §DP
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 . Note that examination of this application has been transferred to examiner Frank Lawrence. Election/Restrictions Claims 8-15 are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. The examiner has been persuaded by applicants’ arguments relating to how there is no additional serious burden for examining all of the claims together. Because all claims previously withdrawn from consideration under 37 CFR 1.142 have been rejoined, the restriction requirement as set forth in the Office action mailed on September 23, 2025 is hereby withdrawn. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement as to the rejoined inventions, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01. Claim Objections Claims 6, 13 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claims 6 and 13, it appears that the second “(ii)” should be changed to “(iv)”. Also in claim 14, “(iii)” should be changed to “(ii)”. Similar changes may be made to the specification if needed. Appropriate correction is required. 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) 1-4, 7-11, 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wild et al. (US 2016/0252450 A1) in view of Donahue (US 2017/0232381 A1). Wild et al. ‘450 disclose a fiber optic sensor for measurement of carbon dioxide in a volume of air or atmospheric environment such as in a natural landscape or wellbore, comprising a fiber optic coated in a CO2 sensitive amine that causes axial strain in the fiber when exposed to CO2. The fiber can be embedded within a membrane member of the sensor, and a computer is used to receive a measurement and communicate results via a wide area network (see paragraphs 2-5, 29, 30-33, 36, claims 10, 17-19). The instant claims differ from the disclosure of Wild et al. ‘450 in that a parameter such as temperature of pressure is adjusted based on presence of CO2 in the volume. Donahue ‘381 discloses a carbon dioxide sensor for exhaust gas that provides feedback for fine tuning a combustion process by adjusting pressure or temperature (see abstract, paragraph 7). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Wild et al. ’450 by providing temperature or pressure adjustment in the CO2 containing volume in order to achieve a desired concentration. Claim(s) 6 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wild et al. ‘450 in view of Donahue ‘381 as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Yu et al. (US 2023/0213669 A1). Wild et al. ‘450 in view of Donahue ‘381 disclose all of the imitations of the claims except that the volume is a boiler, turbine, carbon capture device, or compressor. Yu et al. ‘669 disclose an optic fiber sensing system that can be used in a downhole control pipeline (paragraph 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of the primary references by using the sensor in a pipeline in order to provide CO2 detection and control in an area where CO2 control is needed. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5 and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additional references listed on the attached PTO-892 form disclose optical fiber-based sensing arrangements. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK LAWRENCE whose telephone number is (571)272-1161. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-7pm. 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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. 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. /FRANK M LAWRENCE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776 fl
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 28, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601073
H2 DRYER FOR POWER PLANT USING ELECTROLYZER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594523
MEMBRANE CAPTURE OF CO2 FROM REFINERY EMISSIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595960
ADSORBER, PURIFICATION SYSTEM, AND PURIFICATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592404
HUMIDIFIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582940
MEMBRANE PRECONCENTRATION OF CARBON DIOXIDE FROM EXHAUST GAS SOURCES
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
84%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+19.8%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1399 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