Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/292,326

FUEL COMPOSITION FOR COMBUSTION

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jan 25, 2024
Examiner
OLADAPO, TAIWO
Art Unit
1771
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
The Trustees For The Time Being Of The Kmn Fulfilment Trust
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
53%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
64%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 53% of resolved cases
53%
Career Allow Rate
605 granted / 1144 resolved
-12.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
89 currently pending
Career history
1233
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
52.8%
+12.8% vs TC avg
§102
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
§112
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1144 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1 – 5, 7 in the reply filed on 12/24/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that a proper amendment under Article 19 was filed in the international application. This is not found persuasive because the common technical feature of fuel comprising magnetite additive is known in the art. Also, the fuel types are different for different species. Since the species of claim 9 is different from the elected species of claim 7, claim 9 is also further withdrawn as not being drawn to the elected species. While claim 5 is also a different species from the hydrocarbon of claim 7, the search results provided coal-based fuel and thus claim 5 was not withdrawn. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 6, 8 – 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected methods and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 10/27/2025. 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 – 5, 7 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. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation that magnetite material contains at least 25% Fe, and the claim also recites that the magnetite material contains at least 40% magnetite (Fe3O4) which equivalently provides a calculated amount of at least about 29% Fe to the magnetite material which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. 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. 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. Claims 1, 3 – 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Du et al. (CN 105733728 B) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Du et al. (CN 105733728 B) In regards to claim 1, Du teaches magnetite composite useful as additive in coke, and comprising 40 to 60 parts magnetite, 20 to 30 parts limestone etc., which in Example 1 is crushed to 3mm or less and used in coke (i.e., coal) composition at about 0.2 to about 1%. Thus, Du provides the fuel and the magnetite in the claimed amounts and which provides Fe (iron) in the claimed amounts and thus would be expected to provide the combustion performance of the claim. In regards to claim 3, Du teaches the composition having magnetite in the claimed amount as previously stated. In regards to claim 4, Du teaches the composition comprising magnetite and which would be expected to have the claimed properties. In regards to claim 5, Du teaches the composition having coal as previously stated. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAIWO OLADAPO whose telephone number is (571)270-3723. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5pm. 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, Prem Singh can be reached at 571-272-6381. 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. /TAIWO OLADAPO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 25, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590262
ANTI-FRICTION COMPOSITE MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590263
LUBRICANT ADDITIVE, LUBRICANT COMPOSITION, AND WORKING FLUID COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584078
Method for Producing Lubricating Greases of Lithium Complex Soaps and Lithium-Calcium-Complex Soaps
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570911
A MARINE FUEL BLEND
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571073
ALUMINUM BRONZE ALLOY AND SLIDING MEMBER USING SAID ALLOY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
53%
Grant Probability
64%
With Interview (+11.4%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1144 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