Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/502,457

SYSTEM AND METHOD TO FEED MOLD WITH MOLTEN METAL

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Nov 06, 2023
Examiner
ABOAGYE, MICHAEL
Art Unit
1733
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Molten Metal Equipment Innovations LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
795 granted / 1054 resolved
+10.4% vs TC avg
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+38.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1088
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
45.4%
+5.4% vs TC avg
§102
21.6%
-18.4% vs TC avg
§112
26.6%
-13.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1054 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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the bracket recites in claims 5, 6, 16 and 20, and furthermore the snout of the pump outlet recited in claim 7 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. The drawings are also objected to because in figures 1 and 3A, the numerical label (18) stated in the specification for designating the second chamber appears to be pointing to a wall or an edge of a wall. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: it appears the specification as originally filed does not provide any clear support for the limitation "the molten metal pump comprises an outlet that is positioned to be in fluid communication with the opening in the vessel wall" as recited in claims 1 and 13. Furthermore, it appears the specification as originally filed does not provide any clear support for a snout of the pump outlet as recited in claim 7. The specification is also objected to because in page 1, para [0001], the status of the U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 16/877,296 should be updated as Now U.S. Patent No. 11,858,036. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claims 7 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 7, lines 2-3, it is suggested to replace “the outlet has a snout that is positioned at least partially the opening in of vessel wall” with -- the outlet has a snout that is positioned at least partially in the opening in of vessel wall--. In claim 13, line 8, it is suggested to replace “a height H5, wherein H4 is greater than H3 and H5 is greater than H4,” with -- a height H5, wherein H4 is greater than H3, and H5 is greater than H4, --. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-20 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. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the second height" in the middle of line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the molten metal pump comprises an outlet in fluid communication with the opening in the vessel wall" in lines 4-6. In particular, it is unclear from the manner in which the claim is written as to what the phrase “outlet in fluid communication with the opening in the vessel wall” means because (i) none of the figures in the drawing distinctly show an outlet of the pump (22) fluidly coupled to any wall of the vessel (12)(note none of the walls of the vessel is labeled in the figures); (ii) there is however, a dividing wall (14) that separates vessel (12) into at least two chambers (16 and 18) which appears to be a partition wall within the vessel cavity that is fluidly coupled to what appears to be the pump outlet by the molten metal flow direction indicated by an arrow as shown in figures 1, 2 and 3A. (note, the pump outlet is not clearly labeled in any of the figures). The claim is therefore rendered indefinite since the scope is unascertainable. Claim 7, recites the limitation “a pump housing that comprises the outlet, and the outlet has a snout that is positioned at least partially the opening in of vessel wall” in lines 1-3. In particular, it is unclear from the manner in which the claim is written as to what the phrase “snout that is positioned at least partially the opening in of vessel wall” means because none of the figures in the drawing distinctly show an outlet of the pump (22) to include a snout that is positioned at least partially in the opening in of vessel wall; at least at best in figures 1 and 3A, the pump outlet including said claimed snout appears to be positioned at least partially in an opening in a dividing or a partition wall (14). The claim is therefore rendered indefinite since the scope is unascertainable. Claim 13 recites the limitation "the molten metal pump comprises an outlet that is positioned to be in fluid communication with the opening in the vessel wall" in lines 11-13. In particular, it is unclear from the manner in which the claim is written as to what the phrase “an outlet that is positioned to be in fluid communication with the opening in the vessel wall" means because (i) none of the figures in the drawing distinctly show an outlet of the pump (22) fluidly coupled to any opening in the wall (note none of the walls of the vessel is labeled in the figures) of the vessel (12), (ii) there is however; a dividing (14) that separates vessel (12) into at least two chambers (16 and 18) which appears to be a partition wall within the vessel cavity that is fluidly coupled to what appears to be the pump outlet by the molten metal flow direction indicated by an arrow as shown in figures 1, 2 and 3A. (note, the pump outlet is not clearly labeled in any of the figures). The claim is therefore rendered indefinite since the scope is unascertainable. Art rejection Besides the rejecting under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, presented above, the claims are free from art rejection. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cooper (US 8,337,746), Cooper (US 11,858,036), Hansen et al. (US 6,698,494), Sutton et al. (US 5,735,334) and Pedersen (US 5,758,712) are also cited in PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ABOAGYE whose telephone number is (571)272-8165. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5:00PM. 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, Keith Hendricks can be reached at 571-272-1401. 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. /M.A/Examiner, Art Unit 1733 /JESSEE R ROE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 06, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601022
METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUSLY INJECTING A FUEL GAS AND AN OXYGEN-RICH GAS INTO A UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595524
INDUCTION HARDENING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595529
Alkaline Oxidation Methods and Systems for Recovery of Metals from Ores
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589431
INTELLIGENT TEMPERATURE CONTROL METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DIE-CASTING DIE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12578143
MOLTEN METAL FURNACE
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
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+38.3%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1054 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