Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/257,093

LNG PROCESS USING FEEDSTOCK AS PRIMARY REFRIGERANT

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jun 12, 2023
Priority
Dec 18, 2020 — provisional 63/127,548 +1 more
Examiner
PETTITT, JOHN F
Art Unit
3763
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Jl Energy Transportation Inc.
OA Round
3 (Final)
26%
Grant Probability
At Risk
4-5
OA Rounds
1y 10m
Est. Remaining
47%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 26% of cases
26%
Career Allowance Rate
176 granted / 687 resolved
-44.4% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 9m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
765
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
83.5%
+43.5% vs TC avg
§102
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
§112
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 687 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Drawings The drawings filed 4/23/2026 are accepted. Examiner Comment The applicant is thanked for providing line numbers to the claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claim(s) 1-6, 8-10, 13, 16, 17 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. In regard to claim(s) 1, 16, 17, the recitation, “separating and removing NGL from gas in a first separator;” (line 22 in claim 1 and line 32 in claim 16 and line 22 in claim 17) is indefinite since it is unclear where the recited gas must come from in relation to the previously recited steps. For present examination, it is presumed that the steps c) and d) are amended --c) expanding the conditioned feedstock in a first expansion step forming a gas; d) separating and removing NGLs from the gas in a first separator;” In regard to claim 2, the recitation appears to be wholly redundant to the recitations of the first expansion step and the second expansion step already claimed in claim 1. In regard to claim 3, the recitation, “when a final temperature of the expanded gas leaving the turbo expander is above -262 F,” is indefinite since claim 1 already defines a temperature of the expanded gas leaving the turbo expander and it is unclear why the present recitation does not refer to the previously recited temperature. In regard to claim 16, the recitation, “compressing the gas” (line 12, page 7) is indefinite since it is unclear which gas is being referenced. The recitation, “in step (a).” (page 7, line 12) improperly reintroduces step (a). CLAIM INTERPRETATION The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. All of the claims have been evaluated under the three-prong test set forth in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, and it is considered that none of the claim recitations should be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 4/23/2026 have been fully considered and the amendment is considered to improve the claims, however, some issues remain as indicated above. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN F PETTITT whose telephone number is (571)272-0771. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 9-5p. 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): http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. The examiner’s supervisor, Frantz Jules can be reached on 571-272-6681. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JOHN F PETTITT, III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 12, 2023
Application Filed
May 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jul 30, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 05, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Apr 23, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 29, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
May 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12638239
METHOD FOR SEPARATING AIR BY CRYOGENIC DISTILLATION
2y 11m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12631168
CRYOPUMP AND CRYOPUMP REGENERATION METHOD
2y 6m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12631296
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ASSISTING THE MANAGEMENT OF A LIQUEFIED GAS TRANSPORT SHIP OF THE TYPE CONSUMING EVAPORATED GAS FOR ITS PROPULSION
10m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12590674
THERMALLY INSULATING SEALED TANK COMPRISING A REINFORCING INSULATING PLUG
6y 6m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590758
NITROGEN GENERATING DEVICE AND NITROGEN GENERATING METHOD
2y 11m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
26%
Grant Probability
47%
With Interview (+21.4%)
4y 9m (~1y 10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 687 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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