Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/275,544

CONSUMER PRODUCT

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 02, 2023
Examiner
ORTIZ, RAFAEL ALFREDO
Art Unit
3736
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
CONOPCO, INC.
OA Round
4 (Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allow Rate
689 granted / 1137 resolved
-9.4% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+36.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
1184
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
47.0%
+7.0% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1137 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . 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. Claims 1-5, 7-10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Longmoore (US 2007/0014993) in view of Haetzelt (US 2020/0317688). Claims 1, 7 and 8 Longmoore discloses a consumer product comprising a laminate packaging comprising an outer oriented multilayer film (30) comprising a polypropylene/polyolefin-based polymer; an inner multilayer film (10) comprising a polypropylene/polyolefin-based polymer (see [0030], [0035] and [0036]); wherein the outer and the inner layers are made of the same polypropylene/polyolefin-based polymer, which is propylene-based polymer (see [0038] and [0042]). Longmoore further discloses the laminate of the packaging material could be used to enclose and store personal care items (see [0010]). Longmoore does not disclose the personal care items could include a composition comprising 0.2% to 1.02% by weight of a perfume. However, Haetzelt discloses a personal care product, such as a liquid soap, comprising at least 1% by weight of perfume (see [0041], [0042], and [0182]). The percentage of at least 1% by weight of perfume disclosed by Haetzelt falls within the required range of 0.2% to 1.2%. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Longmoore having the soap disclosed by Haetzelt as a type of personal care product enclosed within the laminate packaging. Claim 2 Haetzelt further discloses the fragrance substance of the perfume could be formed from a single composition (see [0036]). Claims 3 and 4 Longmoore further discloses further discloses the inner and outer multilayers appear to have same size or thickness (see figure 1), wherein Longmoore discloses the thickness of the inner multilayer could be 50 microns (see [0054] and [0055]). Claim 5 Longmoore further discloses the oriented layer is uniaxially or biaxially oriented multilayer film (see [0056]). Claim 9 Haetzelt further discloses the composition is an aqueous based composition (see [0182]). Claim 10 Longmoore further discloses the inner multilayer film is vacuum metalized (see [0035]). Claim 14 Haetzelt further discloses the composition is a domestic cleaning liquid (see [0182] and [0186]). Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Longmoore (US 2007/0014993) and Haetzelt (US 2020/0317688) as applied to claim 1 above. Longmoore discloses the outer oriented multilayer film is uniaxially oriented polypropylene (see [0056]). Longmoore further discloses the outer oriented multilayer film could also be polyethylene (see [0036], [0064] and claim 4). Examiner noticed that polyethylene is known to be a lightweight, durable, and have a cost-effective nature polymer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the outer oriented multilayer film being formed from polyethylene material for lightweight, durable, and have a cost-effective nature purpose to the consumer product. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 01/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding applicant’s argument of the teaching of Haetzelt, the examiner disagrees. Haetzelt discloses a composition which could be provided in a liquid form (see [0042]), and the composition comprises a range of between 0.0001 to 100, 0.1 to 90, or 1 to 90 percentage by weight (see [0041]), wherein all these mentioned ranges include a number which falls within the required range of 0.2 to 1.2 percentage by weight of the perfume. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAFAEL A. ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 6pm. 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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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. RAFAEL A. ORTIZ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3736 /RAFAEL A ORTIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 02, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 02, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 25, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 09, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 11, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 26, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599690
MEDICAL OR DENTAL CASSETTE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600525
STRUCTURE FOR LOCKING AND RELEASING SHEET-LIKE OBJECT AND PACKAGING STORAGE CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595094
ERGONOMIC HANDLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590478
LID OPENING/CLOSING STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589937
DETERGENT PRESENTATION PACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
61%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+36.2%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1137 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