Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/268,770

A Method And A System For Adjusting A Cycle Time Of A Treatment Process For An Object

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 21, 2023
Examiner
SEGED, NEBYATE SAMUEL
Art Unit
1758
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Asp Global Manufacturing GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
29%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 29% of cases
29%
Career Allow Rate
6 granted / 21 resolved
-36.4% vs TC avg
Strong +57% interview lift
Without
With
+57.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
61
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
51.2%
+11.2% vs TC avg
§102
16.7%
-23.3% vs TC avg
§112
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 21 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 with traverse of Group II, claims 10-20, in the reply filed on 11/24/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Wiget (US 20150265738) does not teach the newly amended limitations of a “pressure sensor in communication with the chamber and configured to measure a pressure in the chamber during the first treatment stage” and “adjust[ing] a cycle time of the first treatment stage based on the comparison value and the pressure.” This is found persuasive. However, the technical features of a treatment chamber, a treatment agent comprising hydrogen peroxide, a sensor configured to measure a concentration of the treatment agent in the chamber, a pressure sensor in communication with the chamber and configured to measure a pressure in the chamber during the first treatment stage, and adjust[ing] a cycle time of the first treatment stage based on the comparison value and the pressure still fail to make contribution over the cited art as evidenced by Golkowski et al. (US 20190314535 A1). See rejection below. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 13, please change “valve” to “value” Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 10, 12-14, 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Golkowski et al. (US 20190314535 A1). Regarding claim 10, Golkowski teaches a system for adjusting a cycle time of a treatment process (Fig. 1A, [0186]), the system comprising: a chamber configured to receive an object for a first treatment stage therein (Fig. 1A, 10); a treatment agent delivery system in fluid communication with the chamber and configured to introduce a treatment agent into the chamber (Fig. 1A, vaporizer 32, [0199-0200]); a concentration sensor in communication with the chamber and configured to measure a concentration of the treatment agent in the chamber during the first treatment stage (sensor within chamber configured to sense humidity = understood to measure concentration of vaporized sterilant, [0045], [0060], [0148]); a pressure sensor in communication with the chamber and configured to measure a pressure in the chamber during the first treatment stage (sensor within chamber to sense pressure [0045]); and a controller in signal communication with the concentration sensor and the pressure sensor (Fig. 1A, 12), the controller configured to: compare the concentration of the treatment agent to a threshold concentration valve to obtain a comparison value; and output a control signal in order to adjust a cycle time of the first treatment stage based on the comparison value and the pressure (controller communicably coupled to concentration/pressure sensor and used to adjust cycle time based on pressure and concentration threshold via the blower 14, see [0148], [0153], [0155], [0160], [0179-0181]). Regarding claim 12, Golkwoski teaches the system of claim 10, wherein- the controller is configured to reduce the cycle time of the first treatment stage if the concentration of the treatment agent meets or exceeds the threshold concentration value (controller configured to reduce cycle time based on threshold concentration of sterilant [0148]). Regarding claim 13, Golkowski teaches the system of claim 10, wherein the controller is configured to adjust a parameter of a second treatment stage based on the adjusted cycle time of the first treatment stage (controller configured to adjust parameter of second treatment stage [plasma] such as recycle ratio of plasma to vapor based on adjusted cycle time ([0147-0148], [0153]). Regarding claim 14, Golkowski teaches the system of claim 13, further comprising a plasma generator configured to expose the object to a plasma in the second treatment stage (Fig. 1A, plasma generator 30, [0143]). Regarding claim 17, Golkowski teaches the system of claim 10, wherein the system comprises a sterilization system [abstract] and the object is a medical device ([0009], [0117]). Regarding claim 18, Golkowski teaches a system comprising a processor coupled to a non-transitory, wherein the non-transitory memory comprises machine executable instructions that, when executed by the processors cause the processor to memory (Fig. 1A. controller 12 understood to be processor coupled to a non-transitory memory with machine executable instructions [0323-0338]: introduce a treatment agent comprising hydrogen peroxide into a chamber at a first treatment stage therein (Fig. 1A, uses vaporizer 32 to introduce sterilant into chamber 10, [0199-0200]); measure, using a concentration sensor, a concentration of the treatment agent in the chamber (sensor within chamber configured to sense humidity = understood to measure concentration of vaporized sterilant, [0045], [0060], [0148]); measure, using a pressure sensor, a pressure in the chamber (sensor within chamber to sense pressure [0045]); compare the concentration of the treatment agent to a threshold concentration value to obtain a comparison value; and adjust a cycle time of the first treatment stage based on the comparison value and the pressure (controller communicably coupled to concentration/pressure sensor and adjusts cycle time based on pressure and concentration threshold via the blower 14, see [0148], [0153], [0155], [0160], [0179-0181]). Regarding claim 19, Golkowski teaches the system of claim 18 wherein the machine executable instructions further cause the processor to reduce the cycle time of the first treatment stage if the concentration of the treatment agent meets or exceeds the threshold concentration value (controller operable to reduce cycle time based on threshold concentration of sterilant [0148]). Regarding claim 20, Golkowski teaches the system of claim 18, wherein the system comprises a sterilization system [abstract] and an object positioned within the chamber is a medical device ([0009], [0117]). Regarding claim 21, Golkowski teaches the system of claim 10, wherein the treatment agent comprises hydrogen peroxide [0166-0167], and the concentration of the treatment agent comprises hydrogen peroxide vapor [0038]. Regarding claim 22, Golkowski teaches the system of claim 18, wherein the treatment agent comprises hydrogen peroxide [0166-0167], and the concentration of the treatment agent comprises hydrogen peroxide vapor [0038]. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Golkowski et al. (US 20190314535 A1) further in view of Henniges et al. (US 20200237939 A1). Regarding claim 11, Golkowksi teaches the system of claim 10, including sensor configured to measure the concentration of sterilant with the sterilization chamber [0043], but does not teach wherein the sensor comprises an electrochemical sensor, a photolysis sensor, a photometric sensor, a metal-oxide sensor, or a combination thereof. Henniges teaches a sterilization enclosure for surgical instruments [abstract] comprising a gas concentration sensor configured to detect the concentration of a sterilant gas within a sensor, wherein the sensor may be an electrochemical sensor [0122]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the sensor as taught by Golkowski with the electrochemical sensor as taught by Henniges since Henniges teaches the sensor to detect a concentration of vaporous sterilant [0122] and this involves the substitution of parts to yield a predictable result. See MPEP 2143(I)(B), 2143(I)(G), and 2144.06(II). Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Golkowski et al. (US 20190314535 A1). Regarding claim 15, Golkowski teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the controller is configured to reduce a cycle time a first treatment stage based on a concentration of sterilant and a sensed pressure (controller communicably coupled to concentration/pressure sensor and used to adjust cycle time based on pressure and concentration threshold via the blower 14, see [0148], [0153], [0155], [0160], [0179-0181]) but does not teach wherein the controller is configured to reduce a cycle time of the second treatment stage based on the reduced cycle time of the first treatment stage. Golkowski further contemplates how the controller may be programmed to run various types of cycles including low disinfection cycles and high disinfection cycles, wherein the high disinfection cycle corresponds to a longer cycle time than the shorter [0179]. Golkowski also contemplates how cycle times are readily adjustable by a user given context and can run multiple cycles of sterilization as required [0180-181]. One having ordinary skill in the art would be concerned with optimizing the sterilization process by minimizing resource usage of the sterilant and plasma while maximizing disinfection. One having ordinary skill would also recognize the disclosure of Golkowski as identify a finite number of predictable solutions to the problem (i.e. adjusting fan at various speeds to recycle plasma to reduce cycle time). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the controller as taught by Golkowski to reduce a cycle time of the second treatment stage (plasma being introducer into chamber from plasma generator) based on the reduced cycle time of the first treatment stage (hydrogen peroxide vapor being introduced into chamber) in order to minimize usage of the sterilant and plasma while maximizing disinfection. See MPEP 2143(I)(E). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20200230279 A1 teaches a combined plasma and hydrogen peroxide sterilizer. US 20180353633 A1 teaches a combined plasma and hydrogen peroxide apparatus and an adaptive control system. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nebyate Seged whose telephone number is (703)756-4611. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5:00 pm (EST). 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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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. /N.S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1758 /MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 21, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12571550
ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT FILTER ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565631
BREWERY AND STEAM VENT ODOR CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12458725
AIR STERILIZING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 04, 2025
Patent 12440792
AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION DEVICE FOR BABY CARRIAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 14, 2025
Patent 12419728
TOOTHBRUSH STERILIZING ASSEMBLY AND ELECTRIC TOOTHBRUSH
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 23, 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
29%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+57.4%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 21 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