Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/255,166

METHOD FOR RECOVERING LITHIUM FROM MOTHER LIQUOR AFTER LITHIUM CARBONATE PRECIPITATION REACTION

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
May 31, 2023
Examiner
SMARI, ABDUL-RAHMAN YUSUF WALEED
Art Unit
1736
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Sunresin New Materials Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
34 granted / 39 resolved
+22.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
61
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.6%
-36.4% vs TC avg
§103
41.7%
+1.7% vs TC avg
§102
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
§112
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 39 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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 . Specification The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The specification lacks antecedent basis for Claims 1-10 as Claim 1 requires a composition from Chinese patent CN108421539A, which is not incorporated by reference into the specification. Therefore, the specification lacks antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter of Claim 1. Claims 2-10 are dependent on Claim 1. Furthermore, Claim 9 incorporates a device from Chinese patent CN108893065A, which is also not incorporated by reference into the specification. Therefore, the specification lacks antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter of Claim 9. 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 1-10 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 requires a composition from Chinese patent CN108421539A in line 5. CN108421539A is not incorporated by reference into the specification. Therefore, Claim 1 lacks descriptive support. Claims 2-10 are rejected due to their dependence on Claim 1. Claim 9 incorporates a device from Chinese patent CN108893065A in lines 3 and 7. CN108893065A is not incorporated by reference into the specification. Therefore, Claim 9 lacks descriptive support. 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 1-10 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 requires a composition from Chinese patent CN108421539A in line 5. It is unclear what limitations the reference imparts to the claims. Further, the foreign patent is not in English, making it impossible to determine the metes and bounds of the claim. Claims 2-10 are rejected due to their dependence on Claim 1. Claim 9 incorporates a device from Chinese patent CN108893065A in lines 3 and 7. It is unclear what limitations the reference imparts to the claims. Further, the foreign patent is not in English, making it impossible to determine the metes and bounds of the claim. Since the metes and bounds of the claims are unable to be determined due to the presence of Chinese patents CN108421539A and CN108893065A in the claims, examination versus the prior art is precluded. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL-RAHMAN YUSUF WALEED SMARI whose telephone number is (571)270-7302. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5, F 7:30-4. 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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3591. 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. /ABDUL-RAHMAN YUSUF WALEED SMARI/Examiner, Art Unit 1736 /ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 31, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594545
NANOSTRUCTURED HYBRID IRON-ZEOLITE CATALYSTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583752
METHOD FOR SEPARATING IMPURITIES FROM SILICON CARBIDE, AND TEMPERATURE-TREATED AND PURIFIED SILICON CARBIDE POWDER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582968
DEHYDROGENATION CATALYST
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582922
HYDROGEN SULFIDE ADSORPTION DISTILLER USING PURE COPPER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577898
HONEYCOMB STRUCTURE, ELECTRICALLY HEATED CARRIER, AND EXHAUST GAS PURIFICATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+11.8%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 39 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