Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/272,221

GLYCIDYL (METH)ACRYLATE COMPOSITION

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jul 13, 2023
Examiner
RODRIGUEZ-GARCIA, VALERIE
Art Unit
1621
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Mitsubishi Gas Chemical Company Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
558 granted / 811 resolved
+8.8% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
846
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§103
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
§102
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
§112
36.2%
-3.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 811 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Claims 1-10 are currently pending. Claim 1 is independent. Priority The instant application claims priority as follows: PNG media_image1.png 96 522 media_image1.png Greyscale Election/Restriction Applicants’ election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-5, drawn to a method for suppressing deactivation of a phenolic polymerization inhibitor in a glycidyl methacrylate composition, in the reply filed December 5, 2025 is acknowledged. Applicant traversed the restriction requirement on the grounds that the examiner did not establish that the claims lack unity of invention under PCT Rule 13.1 and 37 CFR 1.475. The examiner must disagree because at page 3 of the requirement the examiner stated why the claims lack unity of invention and why the restriction is proper: PNG media_image2.png 226 688 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 144 684 media_image3.png Greyscale Applicants additionally argue that PNG media_image4.png 66 694 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 60 646 media_image5.png Greyscale Applicants further state that both inventions identified by the Examiner meet the unity of requirement at least under 37 CFR 1.475(b)(2) because claims 1-5 and 6-10 overlap in scope. The examiner cannot agree because, as provided in 37 CFR 1.475(a), a national stage application shall relate to one invention only or to a group of inventions so linked as to form a single general inventive concept (“requirement of unity of invention”). Where a group of inventions is claimed in a national stage application, the requirement of unity of invention shall be fulfilled only when there is a technical relationship among those inventions involving one or more of the same or corresponding special technical features. The expression “special technical features” shall mean those technical features that define a contribution which each of the claimed inventions, considered as a whole, makes over the prior art. The technical relationship among Invention I and Invention II of the instant claims is the glycidyl (meth)acrylate composition with the features of claim 6. This was known in the prior art, as previously explained. Since the glycidyl (meth)acrylate composition of claim 6 is not novel over the prior art, no “special technical feature” exists for subject matter that is common to all the claims. See PCT International Search and Preliminary Examination Guidelines, as in force from March 25, 2004, chapter 10, page 80 section 10.21, Example 1 which deals exactly with this situation, stating “However, if substance X is known in the art, unity would be lacking because there would not be a special technical feature common to all the claims.” The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Accordingly, claims 6-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction requirement in the reply filed on 12/05/2025. 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) 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakawaki et al. (JPH07118251A- cited by Applicant-Google translation provided by the examiner). The prior art teaches a method for reducing the content of a quaternary ammonium salt to 1ppm or less in a composition containing glycidyl acrylate or glycidyl methacrylate and a phenolic polymerization inhibitor. By reducing the content of the quaternary ammonium salt to 1ppm or less it is possible to suppress the deactivation of the phenolic polymerization inhibitor. This is disclosed in at least paragraph [0038] of this application. Regarding claims 2 and 3, the prior art teaches that the quaternary ammonium salts used as the catalyst are tetramethylammonium chloride, tetraethylammonium chloride, tetrabutylammonium chloride, trimethyethyllammonium chloride, trimethylbenzylammonium chloride, triethylmethylammonium chloride, and triethylbenzylammonium chloride (see para [0013]). Regarding claim 4, the prior art teaches that the polymerization inhibitor is phenothiazine, hydroquinone, hydroquinone monomethyl ether, N,N’diphenylparaphenylenediamine, and the like (see para [0014]). Conclusion Claims 1-5 are rejected. No claim is in condition for allowance. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VALERIE RODRIGUEZ-GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5865. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am-5:30pm. 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, Clinton Brooks can be reached at 571-270-7682. 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. /VALERIE RODRIGUEZ-GARCIA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1621
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 13, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593845
2,6-DIOXO-3,6-DIHYDROPYRIMIDINE COMPOUND, AGRICULTURAL AND HORTICULTURAL BACTERICIDE, NEMATICIDE, AND MEDICAL AND VETERINARY ANTIFUNGAL AGENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577243
Monoacylglycerol Lipase Modulators
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568969
PYRIDINE COMPOUNDS FOR CONTROLLING INVERTEBRATE PESTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570618
NOVEL COMPOUND, PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR, AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559466
IMPROVED PROCESS FOR PREPARATION OF INTERMEDIATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
69%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+31.6%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 811 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