Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/508,476

DETACHABLE SECONDARY INCINERATOR

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 14, 2023
Examiner
PEREIRO, JORGE ANDRES
Art Unit
3799
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Zhejiang Pan An Cherry Hardware Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
615 granted / 971 resolved
-6.7% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1010
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
55.8%
+15.8% vs TC avg
§102
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
§112
20.9%
-19.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 971 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 102485585 B1 (hereinafter “SHIN”) in view of KR 20170002517 U (hereinafter “KIM”). PNG media_image1.png 918 1718 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 1, SHIN discloses a detachable secondary incinerator, comprising a furnace body (110) and a base (130/140), wherein the furnace body and the base are detachably connected (see Figs. 1 and 1b), the base is provided with a fence (see 141), the base is further provided with a first ventilation chamber located on an inner side of the fence (the combination of base elements 130 and 140 comprise a first ventilation chamber formed between them when arranged in an operational state); and second ventilation ports (see annotated Fig. 1 above) and third ventilation ports (121) are respectively formed in a side wall and a top surface of the first ventilation chamber; and the furnace body comprises a limiting plate (see bottom of 200/200-1/210), when the furnace body is spliced with the base, the limiting plate is inserted between the fence and the side wall of the first ventilation chamber (see the provided English translation: “The lower coupling part 240 of the present invention refers to a device or means that performs a function of engaging or detaching from the unit body part coupling part 143 of the base part 140 . As shown in Figures 2 to 2b, the lower coupling portion 240 is formed at the lower end of the main frame (210). The lower coupling part 240 may have a structure in which two or more coupling grooves, for example, coupling groove 1 (240-1) and coupling groove 2 (240-2) are formed at regular intervals at the lower end of the main frame. there is. The coupling groove performs a function of being inserted into and fixed to the unit body coupling portion 143 of the base portion 140 .”), and the limiting plate (see bottom of 200/200-1/210) partially covers the second ventilation ports or is separated from the second ventilation ports or forms a gap with the side wall of the first ventilation chamber. SHIN does not disclose first ventilation ports are formed in the fence, a bottom end of the limiting plate is suspended, the limiting plate partially covers the first ventilation ports or is separated from the first ventilation ports or forms a gap with the fence. PNG media_image2.png 900 1785 media_image2.png Greyscale KIM teaches a detachable secondary incinerator, comprising: first ventilation ports (71) are formed in the fence (70), a bottom end of the limiting plate (10) is suspended (see Fig. 7), the limiting plate partially covers the first ventilation ports (71) or is separated from the first ventilation ports or forms a gap with the fence. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify SHIN to comprise first ventilation ports formed in the fence, a bottom end of the limiting plate is suspended, the limiting plate partially covers the first ventilation ports or is separated from the first ventilation ports or forms a gap with the fence as taught and/or suggested by KIM, since such a modification would at a minimum provide greater airflow to said incinerator thus ensuring that the incinerator is adequately supplied with sufficient airflow at all times and, additionally, would provide an alternate supply of air in the event that the air supply means disclosed by SHIN is blocked or otherwise impeded. Regarding Claims 4-5, SHIN further discloses wherein the furnace body is provided with a second ventilation chamber in a circumferential direction (see the provided English translation: “The main frame 210 has a double structure with an inner wall and an outer wall, and has an empty inner structure, and the lower end 212 is open so that air can flow in.”), fourth ventilation ports (see 240-1 and 240-2 which can function as ventilation ports in addition to the open lower end) and fifth ventilation ports (211) are respectively formed in the second ventilation chamber, the fourth ventilation ports (see again 240-1 and 240-2) are formed in a lower part of an outer wall of the second ventilation chamber, and the fifth ventilation ports (211) are formed in an upper part of an inner wall of the second ventilation chamber; further comprising partition plates (200, 200-1), wherein the furnace body (110) is surrounded and formed by the partition plates via end-to-end connection (see 230, 230-1, 220, 220-1), and the second ventilation chamber is arranged inside the partition plates (see again the provided English translation: “The main frame 210 has a double structure with an inner wall and an outer wall, and has an empty inner structure, and the lower end 212 is open so that air can flow in.”). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-3 and 6-9 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because the references are either in the same field of endeavor or are reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned. Please see form PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited) attached to, or included with, this Office Action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE A PEREIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-3932 and whose fax number is (571) 270-4932. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 - 5:00 EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven B. McAllister can be reached at (571) 272-6785. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JORGE A PEREIRO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 14, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601497
FIRE PIT SUPPORT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601498
UMBRELLA-SHAPED HEATER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590696
PULSE COMBUSTION APPARATUS WITH VIBRATION DAMPING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590734
DRIVE TRACKING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584658
PARABOLIC TROUGH COLLECTOR MODULE, PARABOLIC TROUGH COLLECTOR MODULE UNIT, AND SOLAR THERMAL POWER PLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
63%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+21.0%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 971 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