Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/515,107

POLYSILOCARB BASED SILICON CARBIDE MATERIALS, APPLICATIONS AND DEVICES

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Nov 20, 2023
Examiner
DAVIS, SHENG HAN
Art Unit
1732
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Pallidus Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
701 granted / 1064 resolved
+0.9% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
67 currently pending
Career history
1131
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
62.6%
+22.6% vs TC avg
§102
6.9%
-33.1% vs TC avg
§112
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1064 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Interview A telephone call was placed to Applicant concerning the typographical error in the double patent rejection, but the Applicant requested a new office action instead of filing a terminal disclaimer. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claim 33 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3 and 18 of U.S. Patent No.: 11091370. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Claim 1 of ‘370 discloses all the features of Claim 33 of this application except that it does not disclose the molar ratio features of Claim 33, step a. This feature is taught by Claim 3 of ‘370. Also, Claim 1 of ‘370 does not disclose the features described in Claim 33, a, b, c and d describing that the cured material has less than about 100ppm total of the elements selected from the group consisting of Al, Fe, B and P. These features are taught by Claim 18 in ‘370. Allowable Subject Matter The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Nakamura describes the amounts of Si and C above (and the amount of oxygen is based on the teachings of Peters). However, these amounts are outside the range of Claim 33. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHENG HAN DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)270-5823. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30. 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, Fung Coris can be reached at 571-270-5713. 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. /SHENG H DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1732 March 20, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 20, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Dec 17, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 25, 2026
Final Rejection — §DP
Feb 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600686
CO2 RECYCLING METHOD AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599872
DENITRATION CATALYST AND METHOD FOR PURIFYING EXHAUST GAS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595188
FERRITE POWDER, FERRITE RESIN COMPOSITE MATERIAL, AND ELECTROMAGNETIC SHIELDING MATERIAL, ELECTRONIC MATERIAL, OR ELECTRONIC COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594546
ERNARY COMPOSITE MATERIAL HAVING NIO NANOSHEET/BIMETALLIC CECUOX MICROSHEET CORE-SHELL STRUCTURE, AND PREPARATION AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589996
PROCESS FOR PREPARATION OF CHLORINE FROM HYDROGEN CHLORIDE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
66%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+35.9%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1064 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