Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/541,016

UNIVERSAL DISINFECTION CAP

Final Rejection §DP
Filed
Dec 15, 2023
Priority
Dec 23, 2019 — provisional 62/952,838 +1 more
Examiner
OSINSKI, BRADLEY JAMES
Art Unit
3783
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Becton, Dickinson and Company
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
932 granted / 1187 resolved
+8.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1233
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
70.2%
+30.2% vs TC avg
§102
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
§112
6.5%
-33.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1187 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION 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. Claims 1-24 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 11,890,445 in view of Drmanovic (US 2018/0085568). Pending claim 1 is a broader version of patented claims 1 and 8, and Drmanovic teaches all missing limitations from 11,890,445 as addressed in the 103 rejections above. Response to Arguments Applicant's amendments 4/1/2026 overcome the prior art as it is agreed secondary reference (and no other reference) teaches or suggests the cap cover positioned between the inner surface of the sidewall and the outer surface of the protrusion. Applicant’s amendment also overcomes one of the double patenting rejections, but the other remains. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY JAMES OSINSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3640. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 9AM to 5PM. 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, Michael Tsai can be reached on (571)270-5246. 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. /BRADLEY J OSINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 15, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection (signed) — §DP
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP
Apr 01, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 03, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12673164
A MEDICAMENT CONTAINER SUPPORT ASSEMBLY
3y 11m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673167
PRE-FILLED SYRINGE
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12653993
DEVICES AND METHODS FOR REGIO-SPECIFIC DRUG RELEASE AT ILEOCECAL REGION
4y 3m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12653954
MEDICATION DELIVERY DEVICE WITH NEEDLE CARRIER
4y 3m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12653959
Single-Hand Removable Tip Cap for Prefilled Syringe
3y 7m 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+11.4%)
3y 4m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1187 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