Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/331,137

APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ISOLATING HYDROGEN FROM WATER

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 07, 2023
Examiner
BOYER, RANDY
Art Unit
1771
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Raytheon Technologies Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
636 granted / 908 resolved
+5.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
936
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
50.9%
+10.9% vs TC avg
§102
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
§112
21.3%
-18.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 908 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. 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. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. With respect to claim 11, the claim recites the limitation “the heat source.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for such limitation in the claim. 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 A ction: 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. Claims 1-3, 11-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beck (WO 99/57058 A2). With respect to claims 1-3, 11-16, and 19, Beck discloses a hydrogen isolation system (see Beck, Fig. 2) comprising: (a) a protective chamber (20) ; (b) a centrifuge (36) situated in the protective chamber (19) ; and (c) an energy source which provides heat to the centrifuge (36) such that at least some of the water dissociates into separate hydrogen and oxygen streams (see Beck, page 19, lines 13-20) . The system may include a solar field as the energy source and a mirror configured to direct heat from the solar field to the chamber (see Beck, page 17, lines 9-24) . The energy source is configured to preheat water received in a centrifuge inlet (see Beck, page 17, lines 9-24) . A pumping system may be configured to provide vacuum within the protective chamber (see Beck, page 21, lines 1-3) . Hydrogen may be withdrawn from a radial center outlet of the centrifuge (see Beck, page 19, lines 16-20) . The chamber is one that must be capable of withstanding temperatures up to 3000 ° C (see Beck, claim 5) . The water may be received between an inner and outer shell of the centrifuge (see Beck, page 19, lines 13-20) . 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 A ction: 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 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beck (WO 99/57058 A2). With respect to claims 18 and 20, see discussion supra at paragraph 7. Beck discloses wherein elements of the reactor may comprise a refractory material capable of withstanding high water dissociation temperatures (see Beck, claim 11). With respect to the system being “mobile,” the f act that a claimed device is portable or movable is not sufficient by itself to patentably distinguish over an otherwise old device unless there are new or unexpected results . I n re Lindberg, 194 F.2d 732, 93 USPQ 23 (CCPA 1952) . Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-10 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure: Diggs (US 4,071,608). Diggs discloses a centrifuge based system making use of solar energy to provide the necessary heat to dissociate water into separate hydrogen and oxygen constituents (see Diggs, Abstract; and Fig. 1 with accompanying text). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Randy Boyer whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-7113 . The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 10:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. (EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Prem C. Singh, can be reached at (571) 272-6381. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Randy Boyer/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 07, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600911
CRACKING A C4-C7 FRACTION OF PYOIL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600897
LIGNIN-BASED DILUENT AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595427
COMMERCIAL GRADE ULTRA-LOW SULPHUR DIESEL PRODUCTION PROCESS FROM MIXED WASTE PLASTICS PYROLYSIS OIL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595429
Conversion of Gums to Naphtha, Sustainable Jet Fuel, and Diesel Products
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590303
SCREENING OF FLUORESCENT MICROBES USING MICROFABRICATED DEVICE
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+7.8%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 908 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