Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/520,008

MAGNETO-PHOTONIC PARTICLES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 27, 2023
Priority
Nov 28, 2022 — provisional 63/428,231
Examiner
PATEL, RONAK C
Art Unit
1788
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Regents of the University of Minnesota
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allowance Rate
339 granted / 663 resolved
-13.9% vs TC avg
Strong +56% interview lift
Without
With
+55.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
715
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
95.6%
+55.6% vs TC avg
§102
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§112
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 663 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I claims 1-3, 5, 7-8, 11-12, 16-17, 19-20, 24-26, 29-30 and 58 in the reply filed on 04/16/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 36 and 55 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected claims, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/09/2026. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-8, 11-12, 16-17, 19-20, 24-26, 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vitalino et al. (US 2022/0047520). Regarding claim 1, 11, 16-17, 19 Vitalino discloses composition comprising: 1) a complex consisting of a human clathrin triskelion and 2) a therapeutic and/or diagnostic agent, wherein the human clathrin triskelion consists of (i) 3 isolated clathrin heavy chain (CHC) proteins and (ii) 3 isolated clathrin light chain (CLC) proteins, wherein the human clathrin triskelion is linked to the therapeutic and/or diagnostic agent (claim 21). The therapeutic and/or diagnostic agent comprises manganese, iron, quantum dots, photonic dots (claim 36). In some configurations, one or more elements comprise a cargo element, while in other configurations they comprise multiple elements, of one or more types. In some configurations, one or more or each of the elements and or cargo elements is a metal, and or may include one or more metals. Alternatively, each of the elements and or cargo elements is or includes non-metal elements. In other embodiments, elements and or cargo elements are exclusively non-metal elements that may include gases, as well as other elements like biological elements, drugs, optics, polymers (supporting material) (para 0087), where iron corresponds to magnetic structure which would intrinsically controllable to make the particle move. As Vitalino discloses particle comprising a supporting material, magnetic structure and photonic structure as presently claimed, it would intrinsically meet the supported limitation of photonic and magnetic structure being supported by supporting material. Regarding claims 2-3, 5, 7-8, 12 with respect to the “configure limitation”, Any difference imparted by product by process limitations would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made because where the examiner has found a substantially similar product as in the applied prior art the burden of proof is shifted to the applicant to establish that their product is patentably distinct not the examiner to show the same process of making, see In re Brown, 173 USPQ 685, In re Fessmann, 180 USPQ 324, In re Spada, 15 USPQ2d 1655, In re Fitzgerald, 205 USPQ 594 and MPEP 2113. Regarding claim 20, with respect to the limitation of the particle having a disc shape with a diameter of 1-100 microns, Change in size and shape is not patently distinct over the prior art absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed invention is significant. See In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). MPEP 2144.04[R-1]. Regarding claim 24, As Vitalino discloses composition comprising: 1) a complex consisting of a human clathrin triskelion and 2) a therapeutic and/or diagnostic agent, wherein the human clathrin triskelion consists of (i) 3 isolated clathrin heavy chain (CHC) proteins and (ii) 3 isolated clathrin light chain (CLC) proteins, wherein the human clathrin triskelion is linked to the therapeutic and/or diagnostic agent (claim 21). The therapeutic and/or diagnostic agent comprises manganese, iron, quantum dots, photonic dots (claim 36). In some configurations, one or more elements comprise a cargo element, while in other configurations they comprise multiple elements, of one or more types. In some configurations, one or more or each of the elements and or cargo elements is a metal, and or may include one or more metals. Alternatively, each of the elements and or cargo elements is or includes non-metal elements. In other embodiments, elements and or cargo elements are exclusively non-metal elements that may include gases, as well as other elements like biological elements, drugs, optics, polymers (supporting material) (para 0087), therefore it would be obvious that photonic structure would form on the top surface of the supporting material and the magnetic structure is embedded in the supporting material. Regarding claims 25-26, 29 Change in size and shape is not patently distinct over the prior art absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed invention is significant. See In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). MPEP 2144.04[R-1]. Regarding claim 30, Vitalino discloses In addition to the Tor moiety, one or more other functions may be introduced into elements for in vivo use, which can be named as “protector functions” that serve as lipophilicity modifiers or protectors of certain functional groups in therapeutic agent molecules. In other illustrative embodiments, one or more other types of targeting delivery systems and methods n be used, for example, but not limited to, in whole or in part in one or more configurations: surfactants (surface-active substances) and or cosurfactants; enzymatic physical-chemical-based targeting; site-specific enzyme-activated targeting; vectors, such as ligand-based, non-viral-based, and Protein/DNA polyplex vector targeting; receptor-based chemical targeting; organic and or inorganic synthetic elements (para 0380-381). Claim(s) 58 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vitalino et al. (US 2022/0047520) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Aslund et al. (US 2016/0313317). Regarding claim 58, Vitalino fails to disclose that the photonic structure comprises at least one of a dielectric material or a non-magnetic magnetic material. Whereas, Aslund discloses assay plate may be composed of nanostructures capable of binding the biomolecule. Reporter species may be associated with the nanostructure-bound biomolecules. The assay plate may be illuminated with radiation capable of inducing plasmonic fields near the nanostructures (abstract). The photonic material is dielectric material (para 0054). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to form photonic dots of Vitalino comprising dielectric material as taught by Aslund motivated by the desire to have dielectric properties. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONAK C PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1142. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM-6:30PM (FLEX). 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, ALICIA CHEVALIER can be reached at 5712721490. 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. /RONAK C PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 27, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12674090
QUANTUM DOT MATERIAL AND PREPARATION METHOD, QUANTUM DOT LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE AND PREPARATION METHOD
4y 0m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12674008
HOLLOW RESIN PARTICLES, METHOD FOR PRODUCING HOLLOW RESIN PARTICLES, AND USE OF HOLLOW RESIN PARTICLES
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12668531
THERMOCHROMIC MATERIALS AND PREPARATION METHOD
3y 7m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12654427
CARBON FIBER MIXED FABRIC VEHICLE HOOD AND VEHICLE SEAT COVER COMPRISING THE SAME
3y 9m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12655024
COPPER DOPED CARBON-BASED NANOMATERIAL AND METHODS OF FORMING THE SAME
3y 0m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
51%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+55.9%)
3y 6m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 663 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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