Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/367,401

Food Preparation and Decoration System

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Sep 12, 2023
Examiner
PATEL, VISHAL I
Art Unit
1746
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
629 granted / 799 resolved
+13.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
821
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
54.9%
+14.9% vs TC avg
§102
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
§112
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 799 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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. 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 2-8 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. Claims 2-8 recites the limitation "an image upon food" in line 2. A similar phrase was introduced in claim 1 line 2. Is the second instance in respective claims 2-8 referring back to first instance in claim 1? If so, please clarify the claim language. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schnoebelen et al. (US Pub. No.: 2005/0088693 A1) (hereinafter Schnoebelen). Regarding claim 1, Schnoebelen anticipates a computer enabled food preparation and decoration system for positioning an image upon food (Abstract), comprising the steps of: creating a foodstuff database of individual respective edible foodstuffs (¶0056) where each respective edible foodstuff has a foodstuff color (¶0081-¶0088); using a digital image from a customer (¶0013) and matching image colors in portions of said digital image, to a respective individual foodstuff color (¶0081-¶0088); and on a determined image reproduction area of food to be produced, forming a food image of said digital image by placing individual respective foodstuffs having a respective foodstuff color onto respective positions in said reproduction area correlating to image colors of said digital image, whereby a rendition of said digital image is positioned upon said image reproduction area (Abstract, ¶0059-¶0072). Regarding claim 2, Schnoebelen anticipates determining if any of said foodstuffs in said foodstuff database are disliked by said customer; and employing alternate said individual foodstuffs from said database of individual respective foodstuffs from those determined to be disliked by said customer for forming said food image (Fig. 2; ¶0056- customer can select and manipulate images from database). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL I PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-7660. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5. 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, Michael Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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. /VISHAL I PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599927
Electrode Slurry-Supplying Apparatus, Coating Apparatus, and Die Coater
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600120
COATING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595602
METHOD FOR PREPARING ELECTROTHERMAL HEATING SHEET FROM CARBON FIBER BRAIDED FABRIC SCRAPS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583706
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR APPLYING ADHESIVE TAPE LINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587874
WINDOW MOUNTED WIRELESS GATEWAY SYSTEM FABRICATION PROCESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
79%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+10.2%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 799 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month