Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/425,411

HEAT EXCHANGER PIPE SENSING APPARATUS AND METHOD OF USE THEREOF

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 29, 2024
Examiner
MARKOFF, ALEXANDER
Art Unit
1711
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
49%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 49% of resolved cases
49%
Career Allow Rate
437 granted / 899 resolved
-16.4% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+32.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
947
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
§102
25.1%
-14.9% vs TC avg
§112
31.6%
-8.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 899 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 1, 3, 9, 10, 14-16 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. The claims are indefinite and could not be properly understood because claim 1 recites a method for sensing a condition of the first pipe, but fails to recite any step of sensing the condition of the first pipe. The claims are further indefinite because the term “the sound wave” in claim 1 lacks proper antecedent basis. The claims are further indefinite because it is not clear how a sound wave be detected as electrical signals. The claims are further indefinite and could not be properly understood because it is not clear how the output of the first transducer can comprise electrical signals when the referenced transducer is recited by claim 1 as generating a first sound wave. Claim 10 is further indefinite because the term “said step of generating a first force wave” lacks proper antecedent basis. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1, 3, 9, 10, 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The applicants amended the claims the claims as amended require: A method for sensing a condition of a first pipe, comprising the steps of: providing a heat exchanger, said heat exchanger comprising: a heat exchanger housing; and a set of pipes, said set of pipes comprising: a set of heat exchange pipes said set of heat exchange pipes at least partially within said heat exchanger shell housing; mounting a first ultrasonic transducer in contact with a first pipe of said set of heat exchange pipes; mounting a second ultrasonic transducer in contact with a second pipe of said set of heat exchange pipes; generating a first sound wave with said first ultrasonic transducer while in contact with said first pipe, said first sound wave interacting with a third pipe of said set of heat exchange pipes; interacting the sound wave with an imperfection in said third pipe of said set of pipes: detecting said first sound wave as electrical signals after said step of interacting estimating condition of the third pipe with output from said first ultrasonic transducer, said output comprising said electrical signals. The applicants allege that the support for the amended claims is provided by page 36, lines 11-13, page 6, lines 22-25, page 9, lines 18-20, page 29, lines 8-9. This is not persuasive. The referenced parts of the specification merely state: Page 36, lines 1-14: PNG media_image1.png 431 725 media_image1.png Greyscale Page 6, lines 16-25: PNG media_image2.png 360 731 media_image2.png Greyscale Page 9, lines 17-27: PNG media_image3.png 363 693 media_image3.png Greyscale Page 29, lines 1-12: PNG media_image4.png 350 749 media_image4.png Greyscale Thus, none of the cited parts of the specification supports what is recited by the amended claim 1. Moreover, it appears that the cited page 6 of the specification clearly recited “training and/or receiving output from the heat exchange state model with the signals”. It also appears that the cited part of page 36 is not directed to what is claimed with respect to the first, second and third pipes. It appears that the referenced part of page 36 is also directed to the use of a model. It also appears that the cited part of page 29 is directed to an embodiment of Figure 29, which utilizes a single pulse generator and two detectors. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicants amended the claims and allege that the claims correspond to the requirements 35 USC 112 and are allowable. This is not persuasive for the reasons provided above. The amended claims have been examined and are subjected of the rejections applied above. The art rejection presented in the previous Office action has been withdrawn in view of the rejections made to the claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The documents listed on the attached PTO 892 are cited to show the state of the art with respect to the methods for determing conditions of the pipes. The publications of the instant and related applications are made of the record. 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER MARKOFF whose telephone number is (571)272-1304. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:30 pm. 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 Barr can be reached at 571-272-1414. 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. /ALEXANDER MARKOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 29, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Nov 28, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 26, 2025
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599943
System For Spraying the Interior of a Container
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601993
SERVICING PRINT BLANKETS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594586
Cleaning Method for Cleaning a Filling Machine and Filling Machine for Carrying out the Cleaning Method
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582280
DISHWASHER AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588461
SUBSTRATE PROCESSING METHOD AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
49%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+32.2%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 899 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