Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/332,399

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ENHANCING THE CAPACITY OF AN ADSORPTIVE MEDIA TO REMOVE PER- AND POLYFLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES (PFAS) FROM A FLOW OF LIQUID CONTAMINATED WITH PFAS AND AT LEAST ONE PRECURSOR

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 09, 2023
Examiner
MENON, KRISHNAN S
Art Unit
1777
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Emerging Compounds Treatment Technologies Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
71%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
879 granted / 1475 resolved
-5.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
72 currently pending
Career history
1547
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
31.5%
-8.5% vs TC avg
§102
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
§112
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1475 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 35-54 in the reply filed on 10/31/25 is acknowledged. Claim Objections Claims 40-44 and 50-54 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claims 35-39 and 45-49 respectively. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m). The only difference in the claim sets is the addition of “and/or other organic compounds” in the objected claims. The “and/or” makes this element optional, and therefore not patentably distinguishable. Also, this element pertains to the wastewater being treated (which inherently contains many organic compounds,) not the process itself, and therefore not a patentable element. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103 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. Claim(s) 35-54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Dickson et al (US 2022/0177341). Claims 35-37, 40-42, 45-47 and 50-52: Dickson teaches in figure 3 (part of fig.3, annotated, is copied herein) and [0138]-0145] the claimed process. Influent wastewater at 1 is pretreated with ozofractionation at 2-4, and then the ozofractionated water is treated with adsorbent media at 5. Treated water is effused at 5. PNG media_image1.png 278 1052 media_image1.png Greyscale The influent has PFAs and PFA precursors as claimed, and the ozofractionation converts precursors to PFAs. See [0140.] Oxidizing agent is ozone. The enhancement of the adsorptive media implicitly or inherently follows because the conversion of precursors of PFAs to PFAs. Or, at the least it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill that that would be the result of the process. Claims 38, 43, 48, 53: ozone with UV – see [0074.] Claim 39, 44, 49, 54: adsorptive media is GAC, ion exchange, etc. [0145.] Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISHNAN S MENON whose telephone number is (571)272-1143. The examiner can normally be reached Flexible, but generally Monday-Friday: 8:00AM-4:30PM. 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 5712726381. 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. /KRISHNAN S MENON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 09, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594366
TECHNIQUES FOR DIALYSIS BASED ON RELATIVE BLOOD VOLUME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582944
METHODS FOR TREATING POROUS MEMBRANES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577705
ASSEMBLY COMPRISING A CENTER-FLUID DISTRIBUTOR AND A MULTI-FIBER SPINNERET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577130
DRINKING WATER DISPENSER WITH ULTRAVIOLET DISINFECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12566160
PILLAR STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
60%
Grant Probability
71%
With Interview (+11.7%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1475 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