Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/251,806

MICROPOROUS ARTICLES AND CORRESPONDING FORMATION METHODS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
May 04, 2023
Examiner
MENON, KRISHNAN S
Art Unit
1777
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Syensqo Specialty Polymers Usa LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
71%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
879 granted / 1475 resolved
-5.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
72 currently pending
Career history
1547
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
31.5%
-8.5% vs TC avg
§102
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
§112
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1475 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-9 and 16-20 in the reply filed on 9/30/25 is acknowledged. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103 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. 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) 1-9 and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by WO 2018/065526. Claim 1 recites a microporous article having PEDEK-PEEK copolymer, the PEEK and PEDEK are defined by formulae I and II. Claim 9 further narrows down the formulae to (Ia) and (IIa). Further, claim 1 requires PEDEK:PEEK in the range 55:45 to 99:1. Claim 8 narrows this down to 60:40 – 95:5 in the first alternative. Claim 1 also has a pore size range of 0.005-0.5 microns, which is further limited in claim 3 to 0.008-0.250 and in claim 17 to 0.01-0.15 microns. Claims 6 and 7 defines the porous article as tubular or flat sheet membrane. The WO reference teaches tubular and flat sheet membranes (page 27, lines 13-27) made from formula (Ia) and (IIa) as claimed – see abstract, page 4 teaching the polymer as copolymer (PEEK-PEDEK), and pages 6 and 7 teaching formulae (Ia) and (IIa). Page 7 teaches: “[t]he PEEK-PEDEK copolymer may include relative molar proportions of recurring units (J'-A) and (J'-D) (PEEK/PEDEK) ranging from 95/5 to 60/40,” and also >50 mol.% of PEEK on the same page. In the response to the non-final action of 2/3/26, applicant argues that the claimed ratio of PEDEK/PEEK of 55/45 to 99/1 is not met by this range. However, further study of the claims with respect to this argument revealed that the structure of the repeat unit of PEEK: PNG media_image1.png 185 522 media_image1.png Greyscale is present in seral of the strictures of PAEK presented in claims 8 and 20, which can be up to 20% in claim 20 and 30% in claim 8. For example, see the boxed portion of formula (K-E) in claim 8: PNG media_image2.png 152 520 media_image2.png Greyscale This would add 20%-30% more PEEK units in the claimed structure of claim 1, and reduce PEDEK in claim 1 from 0.55 to 0.44 or 0.39, bringing the claimed ratio to within the range in the reference. Note that the claimed structure and ratio only requires PEEK links and PEDEK links, which can be random. Therefore, this would anticipate the claims. Porosity and pore size range are taught as claimed in page 28, lines 21-26. These anticipate claims 1-3, 6-9, and 16-17. For claim 20, the sum of PEDEK and PEEK is 80% or more – see page 7, lines 8-10. Water flux as in claims 4 and 18, see working examples showing significantly more than the lower limit claimed. While the membrane in the examples are not the PEEK-PEDEK copolymer, these are shown as equivalent examples. Nonetheless, the water flux is also an inherent material property of the article which is controlled by porosity and pore-size. Therefore, the water flux required can be achieved by manipulating these parameters, which would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Tensile modulus as in claims 5 and 19: while WO does not teach actual tensile modulus, this is also an inherent property of the membrane – same material and physical structure. Claim 21 is not patentable – product by process – MPEP 2113. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 2/3/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. They are addressed in the rejection.. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KRISHNAN S MENON whose telephone number is (571)272-1143. The examiner can normally be reached Flexible, but generally Monday-Friday: 8:00AM-4:30PM. 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, Prem C Singh can be reached at 571-272-6381. 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. /KRISHNAN S MENON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 04, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Feb 03, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594366
TECHNIQUES FOR DIALYSIS BASED ON RELATIVE BLOOD VOLUME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582944
METHODS FOR TREATING POROUS MEMBRANES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577705
ASSEMBLY COMPRISING A CENTER-FLUID DISTRIBUTOR AND A MULTI-FIBER SPINNERET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577130
DRINKING WATER DISPENSER WITH ULTRAVIOLET DISINFECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12566160
PILLAR STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
60%
Grant Probability
71%
With Interview (+11.7%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1475 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