Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/506,895

ULTRAFINE GOLD NANOCOMPOSITE, AND PREPARATION METHOD AND USE THEREOF

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Nov 10, 2023
Examiner
PURDY, KYLE A
Art Unit
1611
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Innovation Center Of Yangtze River Delta Zju
OA Round
2 (Final)
41%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 0m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 41% of resolved cases
41%
Career Allow Rate
395 granted / 968 resolved
-19.2% vs TC avg
Strong +37% interview lift
Without
With
+36.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 0m
Avg Prosecution
79 currently pending
Career history
1047
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
60.6%
+20.6% vs TC avg
§102
14.8%
-25.2% vs TC avg
§112
14.0%
-26.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 968 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Status of Application The Examiner acknowledges receipt of the amendments filed on 2/2/2025 wherein claim 1 has been amended and claims 2 and 3 have been cancelled. Claims 1 and 4-13 are presented for examination on the merits. The following rejections are made. Response to Applicants’ Arguments Applicant’s amendments filed 11/4/2025 overcome the rejection of claims 1, 2, 7 and 10 made by the Examiner under 35 USC 102(a)(1) over Zhao et al. (JACS, 2016, 138, 16645-16654). This rejection is withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments filed 11/4/2025 overcome the rejection of claims 1, 7, 8 and 10 made by the Examiner under 35 USC 102(a)(1) over Bouvrette et al. (US 2005/0153071). This rejection is withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments filed 11/4/2025 overcome the rejection of claims 1-3 and 7-10 made by the Examiner under 35 USC 103 over Zhao et al. (JACS, 2016, 138, 16645-16654), evidenced by gamma-cyclodextrin (Pubmed). This rejection is withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments filed 11/4/2025 overcome the rejection of claims 4, 6 and 12 made by the Examiner under 35 USC 103 over Zhao et al. (JACS, 2016, 138, 16645-16654), evidenced by gamma-cyclodextrin (Pubmed), further in view of Anderson et al. (J Nanopart Res, 2011, 13, 2843-2851). This rejection is withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments filed 11/4/2025 overcome the rejection of claims 5 and 11 made by the Examiner under 35 USC 103 over Zhao et al. (JACS, 2016, 138, 16645-16654), evidenced by gamma-cyclodextrin (Pubmed), further in view of Hammami et al. (J King Saud Uni, 33, 2021, 1-10). This rejection is withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments filed 11/4/2025 overcome the rejection of claims 8 and 13 made by the Examiner under 35 USC 103 over Zhao et al. (JACS, 2016, 138, 16645-16654), evidenced by gamma-cyclodextrin (Pubmed), further in view of Bouvrette et al. (US 2005/0153071). This rejection is withdrawn. 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. Claims 1 and 4-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites, “…the amount of the CD-MOF material is based on an amount of the γ-CD; a molar ratio of the γ-CD to the chloroauric acid is in a range of 5:1 To 7.5:1; and a ratio of an amount of substance of the chloroauric acid to a volume of the solvent is in a range of 1.25 mmol: 1L to 1.5 mmol:1.” The limitation to “a ratio of an amount of substance of the chloroauric acid…” is indefinite because it is unclear if the ratio is to “a substance” or “the chloroauric acid”. Clarification as to what the ratio is for is requested. Claims 4-13 are rejected for depending from an indefinite claim. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE A PURDY whose telephone number is (571)270-3504. The examiner can normally be reached from 9AM to 5PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Bethany Barham, can be reached on 571-272-6175. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /KYLE A PURDY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1611
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 10, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Feb 02, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599128
COMPOSITION AND METHOD FOR IMPROVING AGRONOMIC TRAITS OF A PLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590075
REFINING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12575565
DISINFECTANT/SANITIZER SOLUTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570568
GLASSES AND GLASS-CERAMICS AND METHODS OF MAKING THEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568974
FACE MASK, COMPOSITES, IRON-IRON OXIDE COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF MANUFACTURE AND USE THEREOF
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
41%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+36.9%)
4y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 968 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