Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/200,005

APPARATUS FOR MANUFACTURING COSMETICS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
May 22, 2023
Examiner
SORKIN, DAVID L
Art Unit
1774
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Amorepacific Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
787 granted / 1170 resolved
+2.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
1213
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
32.7%
-7.3% vs TC avg
§102
32.8%
-7.2% vs TC avg
§112
27.1%
-12.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1170 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ferrante et al. (US 8,308,340). Regarding claim 1, Ferrante discloses an apparatus comprising a storage part (for example the barrel or other container of 102 and the barrel or other container of 104; see col. 5 lines 30-50 and Fig. 1); and a main body (108, 114, 116) capable of accommodating an object that is not a required element of the claimed apparatus, wherein the storage part includes a first storage part (the barrel or other container of 102) and a second storage part (the barrel or other container of 104). It is understood that the microchip discussed in the claim is not a required element of the claimed apparatus. Regarding claim 2, the apparatus further comprises a driving part (the piston part of 110 or the piston part of 112). Regarding claim 3, the apparatus further comprises a control part (the handle part of 110 or the handle part of 112). Claim 4 has been amended to no longer further structurally limit the claimed structure. It is understood that the microchip and the fluids are not required elements of the claimed structure. Claim 5 solely discusses fluids that are not elements of the claimed structure. Claim 6 solely discusses fluids that are not elements of the claimed structure. Claim 7 solely discusses a microchip that is not a required element of the claimed structure. Claim 8 solely discusses a microchip that is not a required element of the claimed structure. Regarding claim 9, a first coupling part is provided at the bottom of the first storage part and a second coupling part is provided at the bottom of the second storage part (see col. 5, lines 30-52). Regarding claim 10, the main body includes: a first main body (108 or a portion thereof) in which a first insertion hole providing a space is formed; and a second main body (114) in which a second insertion hole providing a space into which the storage part is inserted is formed. Claims 11-13 solely discuss microchips that are not required elements of the claimed structure. Response to Arguments As stated in the previous office action “It is understood that the microchip discussed in the claim is not a required element of the claimed apparatus.” In claim 1, the microchip is discussed regarding what the body is configured to accommodate during an intended operation. Underlining “microchip” is applicant’s remarks does not make the microchip a required element of the claimed structure. In claim 1 as currently amended the only required elements are a first storage part, a second storage part and a main body. Ferrante discloses all the required elements of the claimed structure exactly as claim. Applicant’s arguments only pretrain to elements that applicant chose not to require, such as the microchip and the microfluidic passages thereof. Conclusion Applicant's 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 DAVID L SORKIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1148. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-3:30pm. 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, Claire X Wang can be reached at (571) 270-1051. 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. DAVID L. SORKIN Examiner Art Unit 1774 /DAVID L SORKIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 22, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Feb 17, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600060
DEVICE FOR PRODUCING AND CONDITIONING A MULTI-COMPONENT MIXTURE AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A DEVICE OF THIS KIND
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599881
MIXER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599879
NANO CELL BLOCK MODULE FOR HOMOGENIZING A SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PRESSURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594532
FOAM PITCHER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596312
TONER PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING TONER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
67%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+12.5%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1170 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