Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/372,250

COMPULE AND SYRINGE TIP HAVING DISCHARGE NOZZLE DIAMETER WIDENED AT TIP

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Sep 25, 2023
Examiner
GRUBY, RANDALL A
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Shofu Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
289 granted / 463 resolved
-7.6% vs TC avg
Strong +44% interview lift
Without
With
+44.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
492
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
39.0%
-1.0% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
36.3%
-3.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 463 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Status of the Application Claims 1-18 have been examined in this application. This communication is a Final Rejection in response to the "Amendment" and Remarks" filed on 12/03/25. Claim Interpretation For the purpose of applying prior art the following broadest reasonable interpretations are applied. The disclosure does not set forth uncommon, special, or otherwise explicit definitions for terms for which the following aforementioned broadest reasonable interpretations are provided. These broadest reasonable interpretations do not appear inconsistent with Applicant’s disclosure. Broadest Reasonable Interpretations In regards to claim 8, the term syringe is interpreted as: “a device used to inject fluids into […] something” as per the attached definition obtained on 12/18/25 from Merriam-Webster Online dictionary. 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. Claim 8 is 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. As per claim 8, the limitation “The […] syringe tip, which is a syringe” is ambiguous. Specifically, it is unclear how something can be both: a “tip” for a syringe; and, also a “syringe” per se. 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. Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2020152094 to Tiekenheinrich. As per claims 1, 7, and 18, Tiekenheinrich discloses a compule (100) having a discharge structure (50, 24) for discharging viscous material from a discharge opening (see Figure A, below), wherein the discharge structure comprises a flow path (82) that is formed around a virtual central line and allows the viscous material to move (Fig. 1), and a tapered flow path (see Figure A, below) formed between the flow path and the discharge opening, wherein a cross-sectional area of the tapered flow path gradually increases toward the discharge opening (Fig. 1), the compule includes a cylindrical portion having a hollow portion to be filled with the viscous material (Fig. 1-2; pg. 1, Ln. 13) and a nozzle portion (50) to discharge the viscous material, the discharge structure is configured in the nozzle portion (Fig. 1), and the nozzle portion is formed in a manner such that a cross-section size of the nozzle portion decreases toward the discharge opening (Fig. 1; 52 forms part of the nozzle portion and decreases toward the discharge opening). PNG media_image1.png 606 622 media_image1.png Greyscale Figure A: WO 2020152094, Figure 1 - annotated As per claim 2, Tiekenheinrich further discloses in the cross section of the flow path including the virtual center line, an angle between an extending direction of a peripheral wall of the flow path in the end portion on a discharge opening side and an extending direction of a peripheral wall of the tapered flow path is 50 to 85 degrees (see Figure A, above). As per claims 3 and 9, Tiekenheinrich further discloses the tapered flow path has a truncated conical shape (Fig. 1). As per claims 4, 10, and 11, Tiekenheinrich further discloses the flow path has a columnar shape (Fig. 1). As per claims 5-6 and 12-17, Tiekenheinrich further discloses the tapered flow path and an outer peripheral wall portion of a discharge container or an outer peripheral wall portion of a discharge instrument are connected by an annular circular tip surface (see Figure A, above). As per claim 8, and as the examiner can understand the claim, the compule of Tiekenheinrich is “used to inject fluids into something”, i.e. a mouth, and therefore constitutes a “syringe” according to the definition of “syringe” set forth herein under title “Claim Interpretation”. Response to Arguments In regards to the claim objections issued in the non-final rejection dated 06/03/25, the amendment filed 12/03/25 appropriately addresses all and they are withdrawn. In regards to the claim rejections under 35 USC § 112 issued in the non-final rejection dated 06/03/25, the amendment filed 12/03/25 appropriately addresses all and they are withdrawn. The rejection under 35 USC § 112 contained in this office action is necessitated by the amendment filed 12/03/25. In regards to the claim rejections under 35 USC § 102, the arguments filed 12/03/25 have been fully considered but are not found persuasive. Applicant requests withdrawal of the rejections by providing the following arguments: The cross section size of section 50 of Tiekenheinrich partially increases toward the application opening 24. Therefore Tiekenheinrich is distinct from the presently claimed invention with respect to the structure of the cross-section size of the nozzle portion toward the discharge opening. In response to (A), and as set forth herein, Tiekenheinrich discloses the discharge structure is configured in the nozzle portion (Fig. 1), and the nozzle portion is formed in a manner such that a cross-section size of the nozzle portion decreases toward the discharge opening (Fig. 1; 52 forms part of the nozzle portion and decreases toward the discharge opening). Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. The prior art made of record in FORM PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Randy Gruby, whose telephone number is (571) 272-3415. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday to Friday between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM. If any attempt to reach the examiner by telephone is unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Paul Durand, can be reached at (571) 272-4459. Another resource that is available to applicants is the Patent Data Portal (PDP). Information regarding the status of an application can be obtained from the (PDP) system. For more information about the PDP system, see https://opsg-portal.uspto.gov/OPSGPortal/. Should you have questions on access to the PDP system, please feel free to contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /R.A.G/Examiner, Art Unit 3754 /FREDERICK C NICOLAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2023
Application Filed
May 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Dec 03, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 23, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600529
PILFERPROOF CAP ASSEMBLY FOR A CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595105
A BEVERAGE CONTAINER, AND A METHOD OF ASSEMBLING A BEVERAGE CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583648
Portable Fluid Tank System with Mounting Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575587
Secure, Easily Manipulated, Manually Operatable Pressure Relief Valve for Use With a Pressurized Food Dispensing System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576423
DISPENSER
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+44.0%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 463 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