Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/252,560

AIR MONITORING SYSTEMS AND METHODS

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
May 11, 2023
Examiner
AFREMOVA, VERA
Art Unit
1653
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
U-EARTH BIOTECH LTD
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allow Rate
438 granted / 862 resolved
-9.2% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
65 currently pending
Career history
927
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.9%
-31.1% vs TC avg
§103
37.3%
-2.7% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
23.6%
-16.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 862 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Status of claims Claims 1-7 and 9-18 as amended on 5/11/2023 are currently pending and under examination in the instant office action. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Indefinite Claims 1-7 and 9-18 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. Claims 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are active manipulations that are between step of “providing a device” and step(s) of collecting/testing samples. Although claim recites “a liquid” in the collecting means, it is unclear how the liquid manipulated before collecting a liquid sample. The structural elements of the device are not connected to the active steps in a method for detecting biological particles in the air. With respect to depending claims 2, 3, 10 and 11, which further limit the methods of claims 1 and 9 to the use of “first tank” and “second tank” being “in fluid communication” (meaning same liquid everywhere), it is unclear whether these limitations encompass the same tank or two separated tanks for collecting testing samples. The specification drawings show only one tank (tank 301 on figure 1 and water tank on figure 17). Claims 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are between structural elements of the device as intended for collecting/testing a liquid sample. There is a gap between step of providing a device and steps of collecting/testing a liquid. Claims 4, 5, 7 and 16 are rendered indefinite by phrases “preferably” and “in particular”. A broad range or limitation followed by linking terms and a narrow range or limitation within the broad range or limitation is considered indefinite since the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. MPEP 2173.05(c). 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. Claims 1-7 and 9-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2019/194890 (Maggio), US 7,405,073 (Tilles et al) and WO 2019/133718 (Hernandez et al). The cited document WO 2019/194890 (Maggio) discloses a system for air purification (whole document including abstract), for monitoring and detecting air quality parameters (par. 0020, 0034), wherein the air quality parameters include particular matter (par. 0021) and/or contaminants such as bacteria, viruses, spores, etc (par. 0061). The cited document WO 2019/194890 (Maggio) discloses that the method associated with the use of the device (see abstract) encompasses detecting air quality parameters and air contamination destruction rates (0020-0021). In particular, the cited document WO 2019/194890 (Maggio) teaches step of providing a device comprising the same structural elements as recited in claims 1 and 9; for example: see par. 0017, 0034, 0060. The device comprises: “collecting means” or tank accommodating a liquid (par 0017), a “bio support filter” configured to accommodate “a biomass additive” and comprising an air passageway (0060), the biomass additive configured to digest contaminants within air passing through the air passageway by bio-oxidation (0017, 0034, 0060); a pipe system configured to transport the liquid from the collecting means to the bio support filter, thereby providing moisture sufficient for the biomass additive to digest the contaminants (0017, 0024); one or more air inlets for allowing contaminated air to enter into the device; and one or more air outlets for discharging purified air (0017). In the cited device a liquid from the water tank moist the bio-filter and provides for digestion of contaminants and then flows down and washes down indigestible remaining elements (0017, 0074). Thus, the cited disclosure of WO 2019/194890 (Maggio) encompasses the use of first and second tank(s) for condensed liquid captured from air and from digested air contaminants within the broadest meaning of the claims 2-3 and 10-11. The device of the cited WO 2019/194890 (Maggio) also comprises “sensors” for detecting air quality paraments (0034, 0063) that are particulate contaminants such as bacteria, viruses, spores, etc (par. 0061). Thus, the WO 2019/194890 (Maggio) method of using the cited device encompasses step of providing same device as claimed and “step of testing” samples collected in/by the device within the broadest meaning of the claims 1 and 9. However, position of “sensors” in the cited device of WO 2019/194890 (Maggio) is unclear and the cited document does not explicitly disclose step of “collecting a sample of liquid” for further testing of the liquid sample. Nevertheless, collecting air contaminants into a liquid for further testing air contaminants is a common practice and routine techniques in methods for monitoring air quality and/or air contaminants. For example: US 7,405,073 (Tilles et al) teaches collecting air biological particles into a liquid after passing the air through a filter system and testing/identifying biological particle agents by PCR technology (see abstract). For example: WO 2019/133718 (Hernandez et al) teaches collecting air particles as microdroplets of condensed liquid (page 3, lines 14-17) and testing the condensed liquid by ELISA and DNA/RNA sequencing (page 4, par. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to practice step of testing air biological particles after collecting these particles into liquids or as condensed liquids in a method of WO 2019/194890 (Maggio) with a reasonable expectation of success in monitoring and detecting air quality parameters including presence of biological agents because collecting air biological contaminants into a liquid for further testing the air biological contaminants is a common practice and routine techniques in the prior art methods for monitoring air quality and for presence of air biological contaminants and because the cited WO 2019/194890 teaches and suggests that the method associated with the use of its device encompasses detecting air quality parameters and air contamination destruction rates. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to collect liquids present/condensed in the cited device of WO 2019/194890 (Maggio) for testing for the presence of air-borne biological contaminants absorbed and/or condensed into the liquids of the device. Thus, the claimed invention as a whole was clearly prima facie obvious, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary. The claimed subject matter fails to patentably distinguish over the state art as represented be the cited references. Therefore, the claims are properly rejected under 35 USC § 103. As applied to claims 4 and 15: testing of biological particles by claim-recited techniques is a common and routine practice as evidenced by the cited US 7,405,073 (Tilles et al) and WO 2019/133718 (Hernandez et al). As applied to claims 5, 16 and 17: the cited WO 2019/133718 (Hernandez et al) teaches transmitting or signaling the data related air quality control parameters using software and cloud-based server (0022, 0036, 0037). As applied to claims 6 and 18: the cited WO 2019/194890 (Maggio) teaches monitoring biological particles including bacteria, viruses, spores, etc (par. 0061). As applied to claim 7: in the method of the device of WO 22019/194890 (Maggio) the biomass additive of bio-filter support is a non-pathogenic non-genetically modified microorganisms consortium (par. 0039). The claimed subject matter fails to patentably distinguish over the state art as represented be the cited references. Therefore, the claims are properly rejected under 35 USC § 103. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VERA AFREMOVA whose telephone number is (571)272-0914. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8.30am-5pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sharmila Landau can be reached at (571) 272-0614. 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. Vera Afremova September 25, 2025 /VERA AFREMOVA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1653
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 11, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595454
METHODS OF CONTINUOUS CELL CULTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582682
PROBIOTIC COMPOSITIONS FOR THE TREATMENT OF ACNE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576120
ANTIPROLIFERATIVE EFFECT OF AGAROPHYTON CHILENSIS EXTRACT IN PROSTATE CANCER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12533392
COMPOSITIONS AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12496318
Methods for Treating a Health Condition with Probiotics
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
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
51%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+29.4%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 862 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