Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/269,414

ELEMENTAL SULFUR-ACRYLIC EMULSION

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jun 23, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, HA S
Art Unit
1766
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Khalifa University Of Science And Technology
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
57%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
36%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 57% of resolved cases
57%
Career Allow Rate
341 granted / 599 resolved
-8.1% vs TC avg
Minimal -21% lift
Without
With
+-21.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
646
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
39.2%
-0.8% vs TC avg
§102
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
§112
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 599 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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. Claims 1-17 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 recites “at least one monomer selected from a vinyl-monomer group comprising…and mixtures thereof…” in line 4-5. This claim is indefinite because it is unclear if the alternatives are from a closed list (i.e. selected from a group consisting of), or an open list (i.e. comprising…A, B, or C”). See MPEP 2173.05(h) (e.g., alternatives may be set forth as "a material selected from the group consisting of A, B, and C" or "wherein the material is A, B, or C"). It is also unclear whether the “at least one” of the claim requires only one of the listed monomers or requires all of them since the claim recites “comprising…and…” Claim 3 recites the limitation "the one or more first surfactants…" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 11 is missing and thus, Claims 12-17 appear to be misnumbered. Claim 15 recites “at least one monomer selected from a vinyl-monomer group comprising…and mixtures thereof…” in line 3-4. This claim is indefinite because it is unclear if the alternatives are from a closed list (i.e. selected from a group consisting of), or an open list (i.e. comprising…A, B, or C”). See MPEP 2173.05(h) (e.g., alternatives may be set forth as "a material selected from the group consisting of A, B, and C" or "wherein the material is A, B, or C"). It is also unclear whether the “at least one” of the claim requires only one of the listed monomers or requires all of them since the claim recites “comprising…and…” Claims 2, 4-14, 16 and 17, are dependent claims which fail to alleviate the issues above. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 3-10, and 14-15, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2014/0199592 A1 to Pyun et al. (hereinafter Pyun). Regarding claims 1, 3-10, and 14-15, Pyun teaches a polymeric composition comprising a copolymer of sulfur, and one or more monomers of ethylenically unsaturated monomers (See abstract). Pyun teaches that the polymeric composition is PNG media_image1.png 90 602 media_image1.png Greyscale , (Fig. 11), obtained by mixing the monomers of styrene, polyene sulfide, and sulfur, with benzyldithiobenzoate as an initiator, and tetraphenylphosphonium chloride as the free radical initiator, and polymerizing to form the polymeric composition. (para 96-97). Pyun further teaches the polymerization occurs by heating the mixture at 185 deg C with stirring at 550 rpm (See examples, para 47, 88 and 90), wherein the sulfur is in an amount of at least 50 wt% (para 8), and further teaches an emulsion can be made by mixing the above polymeric composition at 180 deg C with water and a sodium lauryl sulfate surfactant (i.e. sodium dodecyl sulfate, nonionic, Triton X100) to form core/shell colloids (para 67, Example 10, para 103 and para 7). Pyun further teaches that the monomers can have specific/higher feed ratios (para 43), which meets claim 8. Thus, one skilled in the art would at once envisage the claimed arrangement combination of the claimed method and emulsion polymeric composition of claims 1 and 15 because Pyun specifically teaches the polymeric composition of sulfur, and styrene, and further teaches the composition in a form of an emulsion with a core/shell colloidal structure obtained by heating and stirring the monomers with a free radical initiator and further stirring the composition in water, which meets the claimed arrangement combination. (See MPEP 2131.02(III), "A reference disclosure can anticipate a claim when the reference describes the limitations but "'d[oes] not expressly spell out' the limitations as arranged or combined as in the claim, if a person of skill in the art, reading the reference, would ‘at once envisage’ the claimed arrangement or combination"). Claim(s) 1-6, 9-10, 13-15 and 17, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2022/0020992 A1 to Lee et al. (hereinafter Lee). Regarding claims 1-6, 9-10, 13-15 and 17, Lee teaches an emulsion copolymer particles are formed by mixing styrene, acrylic acid, and butadiene, (para 123), with a polymerization free radical initiator of potassium persulfate (para 38), water, and a sodium lauryl sulfate surfactant, and heated to 70 deg C and polymerized, (para 123), and further mixed and reacted with sulfur (S8) to form an anode binder material (para 125). The sulfur is added in an amount of 0.5 to 3 parts by weight per 100 part by weight of the styrene-butadiene-based copolymer (para 39-40). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HA S NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7395. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, Flex schedule 7:30am-3:45pm. 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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at (571)272-1302. 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. /HA S NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 23, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595333
CURABLE ADHESIVE, BONDING FILM, AND METHOD OF BONDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595334
COMPOUND, MIXTURE, CURABLE RESIN COMPOSITION AND CURED PRODUCT THEREOF, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING COMPOUND
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590222
TWO-COMPONENT POLYURETHANE COATING COMPOSITION, COATING FORMED FROM THE TWO-COMPONENT POLYURETHANE COATING COMPOSITION AND COATED ARTICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583963
POLYMERIZABLE COMPOSITION AND OPTICAL MATERIAL USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577348
PLASTICIZER AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
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
57%
Grant Probability
36%
With Interview (-21.3%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 599 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