Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/295,070

SOLID OXIDE ELECTROCHEMICAL DEVICE AND UNIT CELL THEREOF

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 03, 2023
Examiner
GARCIA, BETHANY CLAIRE
Art Unit
1721
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Nissan North America, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allow Rate
55 granted / 85 resolved
At TC average
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+36.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
128
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
55.5%
+15.5% vs TC avg
§102
19.8%
-20.2% vs TC avg
§112
22.4%
-17.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 85 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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group (Group II), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/4/2026. Group I (Claims 1-16) is under examination. Drawings The instant specification is clear that all drawings of the single oxide electrochemical device ("SOFC 12") represent a single embodiment of a SOFC, originating at Fig. 1 (see [0005-0011] of the instant specification). Examiner has found multiple discrepancies between the description of the SOFC in the instant specification, and representation of the SOFC in the drawings. PNG media_image1.png 366 600 media_image1.png Greyscale 18/295,070 – Instant Specification OBJECTION TO FIGS. 1-3: The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “the first thickness 44 is provided at the first and second ends 38 and 40 of the anode layer 20” as described in the specification. Paragraph [0021] of the written specification recites (bold text added by Examiner): [0021] In the illustrated embodiment, the anode layer 20 includes a first thickness 44 and a second thickness 46 that is thinner than the first thickness 44. The first thickness 44 having a pair of end portions 44A that are provided at the first and second ends 38 and 40. In other words, the first thickness 44 is provided at the first and second ends 38 and 40 of the anode layer 20 at the fuel intake. The first thickness 44 has a body portion 44B provided along the longitudinal body 42. In the illustrated embodiment, the first thickness 44 includes a plurality of body portions 44B that are provided along the longitudinal body 42 in an alternating order with the second thickness 46. The specification emphasizes the first thickness 44 is “a high performance portion of the anode layer 20,” which is “provided at the first and second ends 38 and 40 of the anode layer 20 at the fuel intake” ([0023]). The specification emphasizes due to this configuration for the instant invention, “faster conversions are possible at the first thickness 44 for methane and hydrogen conversions. In particular, the first thickness 44 allows for faster conversions for reforming catalytic methane” ([0023]). This configuration is shown in Figs. 4 and 5, with the ends of each anode layer having the first thickness 44: PNG media_image2.png 636 954 media_image2.png Greyscale 18/295,070 – Annotated Fig. 4 (top) and Fig. 5 (bottom) However, Figs. 1-3 appear to show the opposite configuration of [0021-0023]. Figs. 1-3 show the ends 38 and 40 of each anode layer have the thinner second thickness 46, instead of the thicker first thickness 44. See Examiner’s annotations to Figs. 1-3: PNG media_image3.png 664 1112 media_image3.png Greyscale 18/295,070 – Fig. 1 (top left), Fig. 2 (top right), Fig. 3 (bottom center) The instant specification does not describe Figs. 1-3 as “Prior Art” or provide another reason why the ends of the anode layers depicted in Figs. 1-3 do not correspond to the description of the instant invention. Examiner notes the feature not shown in Figs. 1-3 (the ends of each anode layer having the “first thickness”) appears to be essential to the instant invention, as it is recited in independent Claim 1 (see lines 6-10 of the claim). Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. OBJECTION TO FIG. 3: The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because the placement of the reference character “44B” in Fig. 3 does not correspond to the description of 44B in the written specification. Paragraphs [0021-0022] of the written specification recite (bold text added by Examiner): [0021] In the illustrated embodiment, the anode layer 20 includes a first thickness 44 and a second thickness 46 that is thinner than the first thickness 44. The first thickness 44 having a pair of end portions 44A that are provided at the first and second ends 38 and 40. In other words, the first thickness 44 is provided at the first and second ends 38 and 40 of the anode layer 20 at the fuel intake. The first thickness 44 has a body portion 44B provided along the longitudinal body 42. In the illustrated embodiment, the first thickness 44 includes a plurality of body portions 44B that are provided along the longitudinal body 42 in an alternating order with the second thickness 46. [0022] The second thickness 46 is provided along the longitudinal body 42 in an alternating order with the body portion of the first thickness 44. More specifically, the second thickness 46 includes a plurality of body portions 46B that are provided along the longitudinal body 42 in an alternating order with the first thickness 44. Fig. 5 shows the end portions 44A, the thin body portions 46B and the thick body portions 44B: PNG media_image4.png 222 992 media_image4.png Greyscale 18/295,070 – Fig. 5 However, in Fig. 3, Applicant’s placement of 44B (the thick body portions) is incorrect: PNG media_image5.png 594 830 media_image5.png Greyscale 18/295,070 – Fig. 3, Annotated by Examiner To resolve the objection to Fig. 3, Applicant is encouraged to either change the “44B” circled in Annotated Fig. 3 to “44A” in order to show one of the end portions 44A, or change “44B” to “46B” in order to show one of the thin body portions 46B. OBJECTION TO FIGS. 4 AND 5: The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “14” in Figs. 4 and 5 has been used to designate the first cathode layer (14) and the second cathode layer (16). The instant specification at [0003] recites “the SOFC 12 comprises a first (top) cathode layer 14 and a second (bottom) cathode layer 16” and “the electrolyte layer 18 is provided between the first and second cathode layers 14 and 16 such that the electrolyte layer 18 is sandwiched therebetween.” This configuration is shown in Figs. 2 and 3: PNG media_image6.png 524 990 media_image6.png Greyscale PNG media_image7.png 582 820 media_image7.png Greyscale 18/295,070 – Fig. 2 (left) and Fig. 3 (right) However, Figs. 4 and 5 appear to show a different embodiment, where the SOFC configuration replaces each second (bottom) cathode layer 16 with another first (top) cathode layer 14: PNG media_image8.png 523 1010 media_image8.png Greyscale 18/295,070 – Fig. 4, Annotated by Examiner PNG media_image9.png 232 986 media_image9.png Greyscale 18/295,070 – Fig. 5, Annotated by Examiner The SOFC configuration in Figs. 4 and 5 (two first cathode layers 14 and no second cathode layer 16) is not described as a different embodiment in the written specification. The specification references Figs. 3-5 and states: “The first thickness 44 decreases the distance between the anode layer 20 and cathode layers 14 and 16 and increases the amount of time the fuel can dwell in this portion of the anode” ([0023]), which indicates there is only one embodiment/SOFC configuration of the cathode layers, and cathode layers 14 and 16 should be shown in Figs. 3-5. To resolve the objection to Figs. 4 and 5, Applicant is encouraged to amend Figs. 4 and 5 with the appropriate locations of “14” and “16” per the written specification/consistent with Fig. 3. OBJECTION TO FIG. 5: The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Reference characters “60” and “80” in Fig. 5 are not described in the specification. Are “60” and “80” intended to represent thicknesses of 44 and 46, are they intended to represent thicknesses of 18? PNG media_image10.png 225 992 media_image10.png Greyscale 18/295,070 – Fig. 5, Annotated by Examiner Are “60” and “80” intended to represent thicknesses of 44 and 46? The specification recites “in the illustrated embodiment, the first thickness 44 is approximately 80 μm in thickness” and “in the illustrated embodiment, the second thickness 46 is approximately 60 μms in thickness” ([0024-0025]). However, the location of the dimensioning arrows for 60 and 80 in Fig. 5 do not correspond to the correct location of 44 and 46. Or, are “60” and “80” in Fig. 5 intended to represent thicknesses of 18? Regarding reference character “80,” the instant specification also recites “the electrolyte layer 18 is approximately 2 μm at the first thickness 44, as seen in Figure 5” ([0023]). Applicant may replace “80” with “2 μm” in Fig. 5 (Examiner also requests the addition of “36” to Fig. 5, since it is referenced but not shown). Regarding reference character “60,” Examiner cannot find any other portion of the specification that may correspond to a description of “60.” To resolve the objection to Fig. 5, Applicant is encouraged to amend Fig. 5, or delete “60,” “80,” and the corresponding dimensioning arrows. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Appropriate correction is required. 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. (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. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Gao, CN 2884547 Y. Regarding Claim 1, Gao discloses an anode structure for use in a solid oxide electrochemical device (porous anode 1 in a planar SOFC [0022, 0056], Figs. 6-7), the anode structure comprising: a first end that is a fuel channel (portion of anode 1 that is the junction of fuel gas inlet pipe 11 and anode gas channel 2 [0056]); a second end that is a fuel channel (portion of anode 1 that is the junction of fuel gas outlet pipe 12 and anode gas channel 2 [0056]); a longitudinal body extending between the first and second ends (portion of anode 1 that forms the anode gas channel 2 [0056]). PNG media_image11.png 452 1074 media_image11.png Greyscale Gao – Fig. 6 See Examiner’s annotations to Fig. 6 for the remaining Claim 1 limitations: a first thickness (portions of anode 1 having the protruding platform 9 [0056]) having a pair of end portions that are provided at the first and second ends; the first thickness having a body portion provided along the longitudinal body ("ridge" of protruding platform 9 on anode 1 [0056]); a second thickness that is provided along the longitudinal body (portions of anode 1 not having the protruding platform 9) in an alternating order with the body portion of the first thickness; and the second thickness being thinner than the first thickness. PNG media_image12.png 528 1060 media_image12.png Greyscale Gao – Annotated Fig. 6 Regarding Claim 2, Gao discloses all limitations as set forth above. Gao discloses the first thickness (portions of anode 1 having the protruding platform 9) includes a plurality of body portions that are provided along the longitudinal body in an alternating order with the second thickness ("ridge" of protruding platform 9 on anode 1 [0056], Annotated Fig. 6). PNG media_image13.png 636 1062 media_image13.png Greyscale Gao – Annotated Fig. 6 Regarding Claims 3 and 4, Gao discloses all limitations as set forth above. Gao discloses the second thickness (portions of anode 1 not having the protruding platform 9) includes a plurality of body portions that are provided along the longitudinal body in an alternating order with the first thickness (Annotated Fig. 6). PNG media_image14.png 624 1058 media_image14.png Greyscale Gao – Annotated Fig. 6 Regarding Claim 5, Gao discloses all limitations as set forth above. Gao discloses a ratio of the first thickness to the second thickness is between 1.1 to 1.5 (first thickness is anode thickness 1 + protruding platform 9 height, 7.5 mm; second thickness is anode thickness 1, 5.5 mm [0047, 0056, 0071], produces a thickness ratio of 7.5/5.5 = 1.36). The court has held that "when, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is ‘anticipated’ if one of them is in the prior art." Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985) See MPEP § 2131.03. Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Chung et al., WO 2009096624 A1. Regarding Claim 8, Chung discloses a solid oxide electrochemical device (solid oxide fuel cell “SOFC” [0009-0023], Figs. 1-6), comprising: a first cathode layer and a second cathode layer (second electrode layer 44 applied to upper and lower outer surfaces [0086], Annotated Fig. 4); an electrolyte layer that is provided between the first and second cathode layers, the electrolyte layer having a top portion and a bottom portion (electrolyte layer 42 [0082], Annotated Fig. 4); and an anode layer provided between the top and bottom portions of the electrolyte layer (first electrode layer 41 [0080], Annotated Fig. 4). PNG media_image15.png 438 634 media_image15.png Greyscale Chung – Fig. 4 PNG media_image16.png 708 1004 media_image16.png Greyscale Chung – Annotated Fig. 4 Regarding Claim 9, Chung discloses all limitations as set forth above. Chung discloses the SOFC further comprises a metal conductive layer (interconnection layer 43 is electrically conductive [0083-0086]) provided over the first cathode layer such the first cathode layer is sandwiched between the electrolyte layer and the metal conductive layer (see Figs. 4 and 6). Regarding Claim 10, Chung discloses all limitations as set forth above. Chung discloses the metal conductive layer (43) has a plurality of air flow channels provided therethrough (interconnection layer 43 alternates with second gas channels 16/17 [0075-0078], Figs. 2-3). PNG media_image17.png 682 726 media_image17.png Greyscale Chung – Fig. 2 Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 / 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in sections Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 of this action. Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Gao, CN 2884547 Y. Regarding Claims 6 and 7, Gao discloses all limitations as set forth above. Gao does not disclose the first thickness is “substantially 80 microns” (Claim 6) and also does not disclose the second thickness is “substantially 60 microns” (Claim 7). However, Examiner notes Gao’s ratio of the first thickness to the second thickness is within the claimed range of 1.1 to 1.5 (first thickness is anode thickness 1 + protruding platform 9 height, 7.5 mm; second thickness is anode thickness 1, 5.5 mm [0047, 0056, 0071], produces a thickness ratio of 7.5/5.5 = 1.36 – See Claim 5). Additionally, Gao discloses the size of a prepared single SOFC cell can be large or small, in order to “meet the needs of building battery stacks of different scales” ([0067]). Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the first and second thicknesses, in the SOFC of Gao, in order to build battery stacks of different sizes, and such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (or dimension) of a component. A change in size (dimension) is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung as applied to Claim 8 above, and further in view of Chesnaud et al., “Corrugated Electrode/Electrolyte Interfaces in SOFC: Theoretical and Experimental Development,” 2017 ECS Trans. 78 (1), pg. 1851-1863. Regarding Claim 11, Chung discloses all limitations as set forth above. Chung does not disclose the anode layer (41) includes a first thickness and a second thickness that is thinner than the first thickness. However, this limitation is taught by Chesnaud et al. Chesnaud teaches various geometric shapes for an interface between an anode layer and an electrolyte layer in a SOFC, wherein the anode layer has varying thicknesses (pg. 1855, Figs. 1-2). C Compared to a flat/planar interface between the anode and electrolyte, Chesnaud teaches multiple benefits are achieved when the interface is pattered, and cites a significant increase in current density and overall improved SOFC performance with a cube-shaped pattern (pg. 1859-1862). Examiner notes Chung’s interface appears to be planed. Chung teaches a “first thickness” and “second thickness,” see Examiner’s annotations to Fig. 2. Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the anode layer of Chung possess a first and second thickness, wherein the second thickness is thinner than the first thickness, in the SOFC of Chung, in order to improve the current density and performance of the cell. PNG media_image18.png 472 1190 media_image18.png Greyscale Chesnaud – Annotated Fig. 2 Regarding Claim 12, modified Chung discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Chung discloses the anode layer further includes a first end that is a fuel channel, a second end that is fuel channel, a longitudinal body extending between the first and second ends (Chung, first gas flow channels 6 extend in a longitudinal direction [0072-0077]), the first thickness having a pair of end portions that are provided at the first and second ends (Annotated Chung Fig. 4). PNG media_image19.png 530 1172 media_image19.png Greyscale Chung – Annotated Fig. 4 Regarding Claims 13 and 14, modified Chung discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Chung discloses the first thickness has a body portion provided along the longitudinal body, and the second thickness is provided along the longitudinal body in an alternating order with the body portion of the first thickness (Claim 13) (Chesnaud Annotated Fig. 2, alternating pattern in longitudinal direction in Chung Fig. 4), and a ratio of the first thickness to the second thickness is 1.33 (Claim 14) (pg. 1852, see Chesnaud Annotated Fig. 2). PNG media_image20.png 518 1230 media_image20.png Greyscale Chesnaud – Annotated Fig. 2 Regarding Claims 15 and 16, modified Chung discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Chung discloses the anode electrode layer has a thickness of 400 μm (Chesnaud, pg. 1852), but does not specifically disclose the first thickness is “substantially 80 microns” (Claim 6) and also does not disclose the second thickness is “substantially 60 microns” (Claim 7). However, modified Chung teaches a benefit of having a patterned anode/electrolyte interface is having a higher current density, and also teaches manufacturing costs are high due to the materials needed to construct a SOFC (Chesnaud, pg. 1851). Examiner also notes modified Chung teaches the claimed ratio of the first thickness to the second thickness (Chesnaud, pg. 1852; see Claim 14). Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the first and second thicknesses, in the SOFC of modified Chung, in order to reduce SOFC manufacturing cost while still achieving a high energy density, and such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (or dimension) of a component. A change in size (dimension) is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Pertinent Prior Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Izawa et al., US 20070298299 A1. Izawa discloses an anode structure for use in a solid oxide electrochemical device (hydrogen permeable/anode metal layer 222 [0081], Fig. 12; fuel cell 20 including a solid oxide electrolyte [0056-0061], Figs. 1-2) having a first and second thickness. PNG media_image21.png 226 464 media_image21.png Greyscale Izawa – Fig. 12 Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BETHANY C GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)272-2475. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 0800 - 1730 MT. 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, Allison Bourke can be reached at 303-297-4684. 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. /BETHANY C GARCIA/Examiner, Art Unit 1721 /ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 03, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603329
Acidic Surface Treatment for Multivalent Battery Metal Anode
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592402
HUMIDIFIER FOR FUEL CELL AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592451
VENT FEATURE PROTECTION BRACKETS FOR ELECTRIFIED VEHICLE TRACTION BATTERY PACKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12580221
SOLID-STATE COMPOSITE ELECTROLYTES COMPRISING ARAMID POLYMER FIBRILS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12555866
POWER STORAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
65%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+36.4%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 85 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