Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/268,960

AIR FILTER WITH INTEGRATED SEALED ACCESS POR

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 21, 2023
Examiner
BUI, DUNG H
Art Unit
1773
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Camfil AB
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
962 granted / 1227 resolved
+13.4% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
85 currently pending
Career history
1312
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
48.1%
+8.1% vs TC avg
§102
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1227 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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) 23, 25-26, and 30-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Braithwaite (US 20100186354). As regarding claim 23, Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention for an air filter comprising: a filter casing (12) comprising: a plurality of rectangular plates (36) having a width along a top surface (at 36 of fig. 1), a first edge and a second edge opposite the first edge, the plurality of rectangular plates defining an air passage from a first opening (14) to a second opening (16) in the filter casing, the air passage extending across the width of the plurality of rectangular plates; and at least one filter element (20) arranged in the air passage of the filter casing, such that air passing between the first opening and the second opening must pass through the at least one filter element and wherein filter casing is manufactured with at least one sealable access port (fig. 2C) integrated in at least one of the top surface of the plurality of rectangular plates of the filter casing, wherein the at least one sealable access port is integrated in the rectangular plates of the filter casing between the first opening and the at least one filter element, and/or between the second opening and the at least one filter element, and wherein the seal (fig. 2C) is provided by a portion of the rectangular plates, and wherein said at least one sealable access port can be unsealed to provide an access to the air passage from the top surface of the rectangular plates of the filter casing to the air passage, and to be used for connecting testing equipment to the filter casing. As regarding claim 25, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention for wherein at least one sealable access port (fig. 2C) is integrated in the rectangular plates of the filter casing between the first opening and the at least one filter element (20). As regarding claim 26, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention for wherein at least one sealable access port is integrated in the rectangular plates of the filter casing between the second opening and the at least one filter element (20). As regarding claim 30, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention for wherein said at least one sealable access port is air-tight (fig. 2C). As regarding claim 31, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention for wherein said at least one sealable access port can be easily unsealed by removing a portion of the rectangular plates ([0028] and fig. 2C). As regarding claim 32, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention for wherein said at least one sealable access port can be easily unsealed without drilling ([0028]). As regarding claim 33, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention for wherein said at least one sealable access port comprises a weakening line defining a punch-out portion ([0028]) in the rectangular plates of the filter casing. As regarding claim 34, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention for wherein said at least one sealable access port comprises a blind hole (fig. 2C; no number) in the rectangular plates of the filter casing. As regarding claim 35, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention for wherein said at least one sealable access port when unsealed provides an access port configured for providing an air-tight connection to a corresponding fitting structure, the at least one sealable access port comprises an access port with a female taper fitting structure configured for providing an air-tight connection to a corresponding male taper fitting structure (fig. 2E). As regarding claim 36, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention for wherein said filter element comprises a filter media (20) configured to remove particles, molecules, gases or vapors from the air ([0002]). 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) 24, 27-29, and 38-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Braithwaite (US 20100186354) in view of Poulsen (US 20190247779). As regarding claim 24, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention except for wherein said air filter is a panel filter, a deep pleat box filter, or a V-type filter, and wherein said at least one filter element comprises a pleated filter media. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein said air filter is a panel filter, a deep pleat box filter, or a V-type filter, and wherein said at least one filter element comprises a pleated filter media in order to enhance air filter performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Poulsen ([0010], [0036] and claim 1). As regarding claim 27, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention except for wherein said filter casing comprises a reinforcing frame surrounding the first or second opening and wherein at least one sealable access port is integrated in said frame. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein said filter casing comprises a reinforcing frame surrounding the first or second opening and wherein at least one sealable access port is integrated in said frame in order to enhance air filter performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Poulsen (frame - 60). As regarding claim 28, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention except for wherein one or both of the filter casing and the at least one sealable access port is formed from plastic. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein one or both of the filter casing and the at least one sealable access port is formed from plastic in order to enhance air filter performance, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. As regarding claim 29, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention except for wherein one or both of the filter casing and the at least one sealable access port is formed by injection molding. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein one or both of the filter casing and the at least one sealable access port is formed by injection molding in order to enhance air filter performance, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. As regarding claim 38, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention except for wherein said air filter is a molecular filtration filter designed to remove gaseous or vapor contamination. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein said air filter is a molecular filtration filter designed to remove gaseous or vapor contamination in order to enhance air filter performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Poulsen (figs. 4, 7 and 9-10; no number). As regarding claim 39, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention except for wherein said air filter has a width above 200 mm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein said air filter has a width above 200 mm in order to enhance air filter performance, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Claim(s) 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Braithwaite (US 20100186354) in view of Stiehler et al (US 20210275955; hereinafter Stiehler). As regarding claim 37, Braithwaite discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Braithwaite discloses the claimed invention except for wherein said air filter is a particle filtration filter which conforms to a filtration class from G4 up to H13 according to the standards EN779 or EN 1822 or equivalent other national or international standards. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein said air filter is a particle filtration filter which conforms to a filtration class from G4 up to H13 according to the standards EN779 or EN 1822 or equivalent other national or international standards in order to enhance air filter performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Stiehler – ([0032]). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 23-39 have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUNG H BUI whose telephone number is (571)270-7077. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 ET. 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, Benjamin L. Lebron can be reached at (571) 272-0475. 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. /DUNG H BUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 21, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 03, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 30, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 26, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 30, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601509
MULTI-STAGE DEHUMIDIFICATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL AREA DEHUMIDIFICATION OF DRY ROOM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599248
SYSTEMS AND METHOD FOR ELIMINATING AIRBORNE CONTAMINANTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594516
FRAME FOR COLLAPSIBLE AND FOLDABLE PLEATED DISPOSABLE AIR FILTER WITH DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE SENSOR AND COMMUNICATION CAPABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594510
REINFORCED MEMBRANE SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594561
A MODULAR CENTRIFUGAL SEPARATOR FOR CLEANING GAS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+24.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1227 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