Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/543,401

DETECTION SYSTEM FOR FLOW CONTROL APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 18, 2023
Examiner
PONTON, JAMES D
Art Unit
3783
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Kpr U S LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
435 granted / 546 resolved
+9.7% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+34.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
578
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
38.5%
-1.5% vs TC avg
§102
18.5%
-21.5% vs TC avg
§112
34.7%
-5.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 546 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, Claims 21-33 in the reply filed on 1/22/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no undue burden on the part of the examiner. This is not found persuasive firstly because there are no Remarks as to why this is the case, and secondly because, as pointed out in the Restriction requirement, the different inventions would require a different search, including different classes/subclasses and/or search strings. For example, the search for invention I would require a search for a housing configured to receive a feeding set that is not required in the search for invention Il or III. A search for invention III would require searching for a memory that is not required in the search for invention I or II. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Objections Claims 21-33 are objected to because of the following informalities: As to claim 21, “the plurality of pairs of sensor component” in lines 13-14 should be amended to read “the plurality of pairs of sensor components” for grammar. Dependent claims inherit the deficiencies of the claims from which they depend. Appropriate correction is required. 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 21-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. As to claim 21, the wording of “each pair of sensor components comprises a plurality of sensor components” in lines 6-7 is unclear as “a pair” is not necessarily equal to “a plurality”. If the applicant intends to further define each pair, the examiner suggests using wording other than “sensor components” to describe a sub-structure of each pair of sensor components. Claim 21 recites the limitation "the second pair of the plurality of pairs of sensor components" in lines 12-14 (two instances). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 22 recites the limitation “the second pair of sensor components of the plurality of sensor components” in lines 4-5 and again in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 25 recites the limitation "the pump" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As to claim 26, the limitation of “one or more switches operatively connected to the ultrasonic sensor for switching between the first direction and the second direction” is unclear as the claim does not make clear what structural and/or functional change occurs as a result of the direction switching. Claim 28 recites “the first and second pairs of sensor components”, however, no proper antecedent basis was given for the second pair of sensor components. Claim 29 recites “the first and second pairs of sensor components”, however, no proper antecedent basis was given for the second pair of sensor components. Claim 29 recites “wherein each pair of sensor components other than the first and second pairs of sensor components comprises a plurality of sensor components”, which is unclear because “a pair” is not necessarily equal to “a plurality”. If the applicant intends to further define each pair, the examiner suggests using wording other than “sensor components” to describe a sub-structure of each pair of sensor components. Claim 29 recites “the respective pair of sensor components” in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 32 recites the limitation "the second pair of the plurality of pairs of sensor components" in line 4 and “the first and the second pairs of the sensor components” in line 5. However, no proper antecedent basis was given for the second pair of the plurality of sensor components. Dependent claims inherit the deficiencies of the claims from which they depend. Allowable Subject Matter No claims are currently allowed. With regard to claim 21, the closest prior art of record is Gaines et al. (US 2015/0093307 A1). Gaines discloses: A flow control apparatus (1; see Figs. 1-4) comprising: a housing (3) configured to receive a feeding set (5); a pumping device (motor 28 & rotor 29) configured to produce a fluid flow in the feeding set (para 0037-0038); an ultrasonic sensor (32) configured to produce a sensor signal indicative of a condition of the feeding set based on a first ultrasonic signal or a second ultrasonic signal (para 0041; “a first ultrasonic signal” or a “second ultrasonic signal” in this instance interpreted as normal ultrasonic readings during operation of the apparatus), wherein the ultrasonic sensor comprises a pair of sensor components (“it is also contemplated that a second, upstream ultrasonic sensor may be used” – para 0041); and a control circuit in communication with the ultrasonic sensor configured to receive the sensor signal from the ultrasonic sensor indicative of the condition of the feeding set (see para 0037, 0041, 0044, Fig. 4). However, Gaines et al. is silent to a plurality of pairs of sensor components, and wherein each pair of sensor components comprises a plurality of sensor components, the ultrasonic sensor being further configured to emit the first ultrasonic signal though a portion of the feeding set in a first direction from an emitter component of a first pair of the plurality of pairs of sensor components to a detector component of the first pair of the plurality of pairs of sensor components, and to emit the second ultrasonic signal through the portion of the feeding set in a second direction opposite the first direction from an emitter component of the second pair of the plurality of pairs of sensor components to a detector component of the second pair of the plurality of pairs of sensor component, wherein the sensor signal is produced based on a stronger signal of the first ultrasonic signal and the second ultrasonic signal. Urdaneta et al. (US 2005/0288873 A1) discloses a pair of sensor components (134, 136; see Fig. 2), wherein the pair comprises a plurality of sensor components (“each ultrasonic transducer 134, 136 may comprise a piezoelectric transducer (vibrator) that includes a piezoelectric ceramic element (for example, lead zirconate-titanate) and a pair of electrodes for applying an electric voltage to the piezoelectric ceramic element” – para 0038). Birtcher et al. (US 10,151,618 B2) discloses a plurality of pairs of sensor components (see Fig. 5 and paragraph beginning line 59 col. 13). However, Urdaneta et al., and/or Birtcher et al. do not appear to teach/make obvious a manner of modifying Gaines et al. to satisfy all the limitations of instant claim 21 in combination. The examiner notes however, that any amendments to address the rejections under 35 USC § 112 may impact the prior art considerations. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James D Ponton whose telephone number is (571)272-1001. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at 571-270-1744. 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. /James D Ponton/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 16, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599749
CONTROLLABLE INSERTION SLEEVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599719
CLOSED SYSTEM ELASTOMERIC PUMPING MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594376
COMPACT POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT PUMP FOR WEARABLE DRUG DELIVERY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582768
MEDICAMENT DELIVERY SYSTEM, AND ASSOCIATED METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582765
PUMP WITH PUMPING CHAMBER CREATED BY TELESCOPING ACTION DRIVEN BY FRICTION
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
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+34.6%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 546 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