Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/319,222

DEVICE AND METHOD FOR PREPARING BONE CEMENT PASTE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
May 17, 2023
Examiner
INSLER, ELIZABETH
Art Unit
1774
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Heraeus
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
348 granted / 524 resolved
+1.4% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
564
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
36.9%
-3.1% vs TC avg
§102
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§112
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 524 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,414,806. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,414,806 would encompass and anticipated all the elements of the instant claims 1-15. Allowable Subject Matter The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The instant Application has similar limitations to Application 18/338,436, filed 6/21/2023, now U.S. Patent No. 12,414,806. An updated search was conducted on 3/10/2026, and the claims contain allowable subject matter. Examiner has conducted an exhaustive search and the closest prior art found include Vogt et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2017/0354942) and Vogt et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,339,317. However, in light of the prior art, the claims distinguish over the prior art in that the references fail to show or render obvious either alone or in combination without impermissible hindsight the features of a reservoir for a monomer liquid as a second starting component, comprising a conduit connecting the interior of the mixing unit to the reservoir in terms of fluid conduction, wherein the conduit extends through a cartridge head duct of the cartridge head of the mixing unit, and the conduit and the cartridge head duct form a first form closure, and wherein the reservoir comprises a connecting element to connect the reservoir to the mixing unit via a second form closure. Claims 1-15 would be allowable if the double patenting rejection is overcome. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH INSLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0492. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm. 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, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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. /ELIZABETH INSLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 17, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600302
MIXER LADDER ASSIST
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601075
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ELECTROLYTE SOLUTION PRODUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589367
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR GASSING A LIQUID
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582945
METHOD FOR OPERATING A MIXING APPARATUS OF A MANUFACTURING PLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576371
SOLUTION APPLICATOR ASSEMBLY WITH REMOVABLE FLOW CONTROL INSERT
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
66%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+25.8%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 524 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