Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/467,717

METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DETERMINING COMBUSTION CHARACTERISTICS OF MIXTURES OF GASIFICATION SLAG AND COAL

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Sep 14, 2023
Examiner
DESTA, ELIAS
Art Unit
2857
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
China University Of Mining And Technology
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
886 granted / 1055 resolved
+16.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1088
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§103
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
§102
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
§112
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1055 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §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 . Drawing The drawing filed on September 14, 2023 is accepted by the Examiner. Specification The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim rejection – 35 U.S.C. §112 Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite: claims 1 and 18: call for determining a combustion characteristic of a mixture of gasification slag and coal; and yet the last step states determining a combustion characteristic of the mixture to be tested. Is the mixture to be tested the same as the mixture of gasification slag and coal, if so, it has to be stated in order to avoid antecedent issues. The remaining claims inherits the attributes of claim 1 or include similar issues. Claim rejection – 35 U.S.C. §101 35 U.S.C. §101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. In reference to claims 1-20: the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more. The requirement for subject matter eligibility test for products and processes requires first, the claimed invention must be to one of the four statutory categories. 35 U.S.C. § 101 defines the four categories of invention that Congress deemed to be the appropriate subject matter of a patent: processes, machines, manufactures and compositions of matter. The latter three categories define "things" or "products" while the first category defines "actions" (i.e., inventions that consist of a series of steps or acts to be performed). Second, the claimed invention also must qualify as patent-eligible subject matter, i.e., the claim must not be directed to a judicial exception unless the claim as a whole includes additional limitations amounting to significantly more than the exception. The judicial exceptions (also called "judicially recognized exceptions" or simply "exceptions") are subject matter that the courts have found to be outside of, or exceptions to, the four statutory categories of invention, and are limited to abstract ideas, laws of nature and natural phenomena (including products of nature). In the first step, it is to be determined whether the patent claim under examination is directed to an abstract idea. If so, in the second step of analysis, it is to be determined whether the patent adds to the idea "something more" or "significantly more" that embodies an "inventive concept." In the instant case, claim 1 is representative and it is reproduced here with the limitations that are part of the abstract idea in bold: A method for determining a combustion characteristic of a mixture of gasification slag and coal, implemented by a processor, wherein the combustion characteristic includes at least one of an ignition temperature, a burnout temperature, or a composite combustion characteristic index, comprising: obtaining first basic data of sample coal and sample gasification slag, the first basic data including at least one of a moisture content, a volatile matter, or a fixed carbon; obtaining second basic data of coal to be tested and gasification slag to be tested in a mixture to be tested and a mixing ratio of the mixture to be tested; and determining a combustion characteristic of the mixture to be tested based on the first basic data, the second basic data, and the mixing ratio. Step 2A Prong I: The claim recites the steps of " obtaining first basic data of sample coal and sample gasification slag, the first basic data including at least one of a moisture content, a volatile matter, or a fixed carbon; obtaining second basic data of coal to be tested and gasification slag to be tested in a mixture to be tested and a mixing ratio of the mixture to be tested; and determining a combustion characteristic of the mixture to be tested based on the first basic data, the second basic data, and the mixing ratio.". These limitations could be carried out as a purely mental process (at least in a some relatively simple situations) and/or they could amount to a mathematical calculation (for example determining a combustion characteristic based on the first basic data, the second basic data, and the mixing ratio). Therefore, the recited method falls in the abstract idea grouping of mental process and/or mathematical concepts at Prong I of the §101 analysis. Prong II: This abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application at Prong 2 of the §101 analysis because the claim does not recite sufficient additional elements to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim recites the method comprising a processor to implement the method noted in the instant claim". However, the processor is a generic computer element invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea, which does not cause the claim as a whole to integrate the abstract idea into a particular practical application or provide significantly more than the recited abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(b)). The two obtaining steps are considered to be merely a data gathering step recited at a high level of generality. The courts have found that adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, e.g., mere data gathering in conjunction with a law of nature or abstract idea (such as a step of obtaining information about credit card transactions so that the information can be analyzed by an abstract mental process, as discussed in CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1375, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011) is not enough to integrate the abstract idea into a particular practical application or make the claim qualify as "significantly more" (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)). The claim does not recite applying the abstract idea with, or by use of, any particular machine, nor does the claim affect a real-world transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing. The claim amounts to manipulating data: determining a combustion characteristic of the mixture to be tested based on the first basic data, the second basic data, and the mixing ratio. The claim does not recite any particular real-world actions that are taken as a result of such characterization. Therefore, the claimed invention does not appear to be limited to the use of the mental process or math in a particular practical application, but instead the claim appears to monopolize the mental process or math itself, in any practical application where it might conceivably be used. Step 2B: Finally, at Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons as discussed above with regard to Prong 2. Claim 1 is rejected as ineligible under 35 USC §101. Claims 18 and 20 are analogous to claim 1, except that claim 18 includes first and second modules; and claim 20 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium; which are included as a generic element. However, these elements do not change the above §101 analysis. Therefore, claims 18 and 20 are therefore rejected as ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101 as well. Dependent claim 2: the instant claim is directed to obtaining basic data and establishing basic data base of the sample coal and gasification slag; and it is insignificant extra-solution activity. Dependent claim 3: the instant claim is directed to industrial analysis using some kind of instrument; and would amount to be a human thought process; as the instruments would amount to be extension of a human thought process, just as using generic devices or tools as an extension of human thought process. Dependent claim 4: the instant claim is directed to obtaining second basic data; and would be considered a data gathering steps does not amount to be significantly more than the abstract idea. Dependent claims 5 and 6: the instant claims are directed to the determination of combustion characteristic using the three variables, i.e., the first basic data, the second basic data and the mixing ratio. The recited method falls in the abstract idea grouping of mental process and/or mathematical concepts. Dependent claims 7 and 8: the instant clams are directed to establishing the relationship between variables and falls in the abstract idea grouping of a mental process and/or mathematical concepts. Dependent claim 9: the instant claim is directed to establishing or constructing orthogonal table and would be considered abstract idea grouping of mental process and/or mathematical concepts. Dependent claim 10: the instant claim is directed to determining the importance of each piece of basic data; and it is considered abstract idea grouping of mental process and/or mathematical concepts. Dependent claim 11: the instant claim is directed to defining first combustion coefficient; and considered an abstract idea grouping of mental process and/or mathematical concepts. Dependent claims 12-14: the instant claims are directed to a general idea of obtaining the first or the second combustion coefficient through an observation of training of some kind and it is considered abstract idea grouping of mental process and/or mathematical concepts. Dependent claims 15 and 16: the instant claims are directed to determining the combustion characteristics of the mixture to be tested and forming a prediction model; and it is considered abstract idea grouping of mental process and/or mathematical concepts. Dependent claim 17: the instant claim is directed to a third training set that includes a real sample and a theoretical sample; and training the combustion characteristic prediction model of generic in nature and it is considered insignificant extra solution activity. Dependent claim 19: the instant claim is directed to the determination module is a mathematical module that takes values of the fist basic data, the second basic data, the target basic data, and the mixing ratio; and is considered abstract idea grouping of mental process and/or mathematical concepts. Prior art of Interest In reference to claims 1-20: Danguillier et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,066,420, hereon Danguillier) discloses a process for gasification of pulverized or fine-grain coal. The process uses a portion of the combustible gas generated at a temperature between 1500.degree. and 2200.degree. C in a slag bath generator as a gaseous agent that is mixed with the coal and then introduced under pressure into the slag bath generator. The portion of the combustible gas to be used for this purpose undergoes processing which includes extracting dust, cooling and drying before the gas is combined with the fuel. Further, the combustible gas produced in the generator is used in the reduction process by feeding the gas into a reduction shaft furnace. The top gas from the shaft furnace is processed by extracting dust, cooling, drying and normalizing the acidity of the top gas before the top gas is combined with fuel for introduction as a mixture into the slag bath generator (see Danguillier, abstract). The instant application is directed to characterizing a mixture of gasification slag and coal on the basis of fist basic data (including at least one of moisture content, a volatile matter, or a fixed carbon), the second basic data (coal to be tested and gasification slag to be tested in a mixture to be tested and a mixing ratio of the mixture to be tested) and the mixture ratio. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lee et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,544,429) discloses a method for predicting an initial deformation temperature of coal without an addition test by using a predictive model. The method includes a parameter extractor configured to analyze characteristics of test coal and to extract parameters of test coal based on the test coal characteristics analysis; a temperature analyzer configured to analyze an initial deformation temperature (IDT) of the test coal; a modeler configured to derive an IDT predictive model for predicting the test coal IDT using the extracted parameters of the test coal and the test coal IDT; and a predictor configured to predict an initial deformation temperature (IDT) of target coal to be supplied to the coal-fired power plant by substituting parameters of the target coal into the IDT predictive model. McKnight et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,958,158) discloses a method for the processing of biomass and other solid fuel materials into an explosible powder and the combustion of the materials for a direct conversion into energy to heat or perform work. Further the method helps harnessing of long-feared dust explosions and operating new solid fuel burners to accomplish a unique energy conversion process. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIAS DESTA whose telephone number is (571)272-2214. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30 to 5:00 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, Andrew M Schechter can be reached at 571-272-2302. 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. /ELIAS DESTA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 14, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596201
COMBINED CONFIGURATION OF A FREE-FIELD SENSOR, A STRUCTURAL SENSOR, A DEEP-WELL SEISMOGRAPH, AND A REMOTE SIGNAL SOURCE, AND ITS EARTHQUAKE DETECTING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12578491
IMPLICIT FINITE-DIFFERENCE METHOD FOR RESERVOIR IDENTIFICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575032
DIAGNOSTIC DISC WITH A HIGH VACUUM AND TEMPERATURE TOLERANT POWER SOURCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565835
Correlated Wave-Particle Application For Downhole Measurements
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12560732
DYNAMIC RESOLUTION FULL-WAVEFORM INVERSION METHOD AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
84%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+9.5%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1055 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