Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/433,678

Systems and Methods for Using Discarded Asphalt Shingles (DAS) for Fill Replacement and for Structural Members in Building and Surface Constructions

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Feb 06, 2024
Examiner
ARMSTRONG, KYLE
Art Unit
3619
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Shingle Waste Solutions Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
496 granted / 689 resolved
+20.0% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+30.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
710
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.0%
+5.0% vs TC avg
§102
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
§112
28.8%
-11.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 689 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. 11,891,769. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because although they have different claim language they contain essentially the same subject matter and it would have been obvious that they overlap in scope. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 1 is 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. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Devine et al. (US 2016/0177529) discloses a support base/foundation having a hollow central portion filled with recycled construction materials including ground up asphalt shingles. Meyers ITT et al. (US 2005/0035484) discloses recyclable composite materials for use as a controlled fill material comprising ground up asphalt shingles. (DE 202018101426 U1) discloses a series of frames for constructing a wall element having asphalt shingles disposed therein. However, the prior art of record fails to disclose, teach or suggest — either alone or in combination — a construction block and soil stabilization method comprising a quantity of discarded/degraded asphalt shingles stacked in parallel layers to form a moisture barrier in combination with a quantity of select fill to form a rigid structure that is disposed in in-situ expansive soils; as explicitly recited 1n the instant claims.. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE A ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F ~10-6. 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, Anita Coupe can be reached at (571) 270-3614. 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. KYLE ARMSTRONG, P.E. Primary Examiner Art Unit 3678 /KYLE ARMSTRONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 06, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 22, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601219
FLOOD PROTECTION BARRIER AND A FLOOD PROTECTION BARRIER MONITORING AND CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12584059
SEALING ELEMENT HAVING A POLYMER BLEND FOR SUBSURFACE CARBON SEQUESTRATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584285
FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION METHOD AND ANCHOR SUPPORT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584303
STRESS-REDUCING PROFILE FOR MODULAR STORM DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577876
Compact Machine for Carrying Tools
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+30.9%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 689 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