Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/455,599

MOLTEN GLASS TRANSPORT SYSTEMS AND METHODS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 24, 2023
Examiner
DEHGHAN, QUEENIE S
Art Unit
1741
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Owens-Brockway Glass Container Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
73%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
519 granted / 839 resolved
-3.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
891
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
52.9%
+12.9% vs TC avg
§102
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
§112
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 839 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claims 9-10 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flynn et al. (2023/0097028). Flynn teaches a glass manufacturing system comprising a glass forming system including glass forming machines arranged adjacent to one another, and each including blank molds having blank mold loading axes, and blow molds spaced apart from the blank molds ([0033], fig. 1). Flynn also teaches a molten glass handling system including a glass feeder to feed molten glass along a feeder axis offset from the blank mold loading axes ([0033], [0037] fig. 1), and a molten glass transport system to transport the molten glass to the blank molds of the glass forming machines, the molten glass transport system including cup sub-carriages, and a gantry having rails along which carriages may ride, wherein the carriages comprises the cup sub-carriages with sub-rails extending transversely with respect to the other rails and along which one or more sub-carriages may ride ([0045]). Naturally the rails and sub-rails would be spaced laterally apart from one another, the sub-rails establishing a cup transport path, and the rails establishing a rail path, wherein the cup sub-carriages extend laterally between the sub-rails and movable back and forth along the cup transport path between the feeder axis and one or more blank mold loading axes, the cup sub-carriages including one or more transport cups 32 for receiving molten glass from the feeder and dispensing the molten glass to the blank molds along the blank mold loading axes ([0038]-[0039],[0045], fig. 1). Flynn doesn’t specify the sub-rails are movable carried along the rail path. However, Flynn teaches the sub-rails extends transversely with respect to the other rails, and given the carriages ride on the rails and sub-carriages (of a carriage) ride on the sub-rails, then it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have expected the sub0rails are movably carried along the rail path transverse to the cup transport path. This is further supported by desired to translate the transport cup in transverse directions, such as the X and Z directions in figure 7 ([0053]). Regarding claim 10, Flynn discloses the carriages/sub-carriages are suspended from the rails/sub-rails, especially when the gantry is an overhead gantry ([0045], fig. 1). Regarding claim 13, Flynn teaches an additional gantry, which suggests additional rails spaced laterally apart from one another, and establishing an additional cup transport path vertically adjacent to the cup transport path, and additional cup carriages extending laterally between the additional rails and movable back and forth along the additional cup transport path between the feeder axis and the blank mold loading axes ([0047]-[0048], fig. 5). Regarding claim 14, Flynn teaches the rails extend beyond a lengthwise extend of the blank molds of the glass forming machines ([0046], figures 1 and 5) to establish at least one cup carriage parking station, where it receives a cup treatment ([0044]) Allowable Subject Matter Claim 15 is allowed. Claims 11-12, 16-17, 19-31, and 33 are 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art a molten glass transport system comprising rails spaced laterally apart from one another to establish a cup transport path, a fixed frame, at least one actuator operatively coupled between the fixed frame and the rails for moving the rails along a rail path on the fixed frame, the rail path being transverse to the cup transport path, wherein cup carriages with transport cups are moved along the cup transport path between a glass feeder and a blank mold. The prior art also fails to disclose a shield located between the glass feeder and blank mold, extending laterally between the rails. The prior art also fails to suggest cup carriages carried by rails, wherein the cup carriages comprises carriage carts spaced laterally apart and coupled to the rails, and carriage frames coupled and extending between the carriage carts and extending laterally between the rails. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, filed December 15, 2025, with respect to Graff have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 103 rejection of claim 9 has been withdrawn. While applicant has incorporated some of allowed claim 11 into claim 9, it is not sufficient to place the claim in condition for allowance. As noted in the previous action, it is the combination of at least one actuator, a fixed frame, rails for a cup transport path, and a transverse rail path that is allowable, wherein the actuator operatively coupled between the fixed frame and the rails for moving the rails along a rail path on the fixed frame, the rail path being transverse to the cup transport path and the cup carriages with transport cups are moved along the cup transport path between the feeder and the mold. 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUEENIE S DEHGHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8209. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:30. 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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached at 571-270-7001. 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. /QUEENIE S DEHGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 24, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 15, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 28, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600658
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PLATINUM FREE MELTING OF HIGH INDEX GLASSES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595200
MOLTEN GLASS TRANSPORT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590025
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PROCESSING GLASS ELEMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590028
METHOD FOR TREATMENT OF A GLASS SUBSTRATE WITH IMPROVED EDGE STRENGTH
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12570565
GLASS TUBE CONVERTING PROCESS WITH PIERCING DURING INDEX
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
73%
With Interview (+11.1%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 839 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