Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/547,770

PARTICLES HAVING RUTILE CRYSTAL STRUCTURE, PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR, AND PRODUCTION METHOD FOR PARTICLE DISPERSION LIQUID, COATING LIQUID, AND SUBSTRATE WITH FILM

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Aug 24, 2023
Priority
Mar 31, 2021 — JP 2021-061695 +1 more
Examiner
BAUM, ZACHARY JOHN
Art Unit
1736
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
JGC Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
98 granted / 121 resolved
+16.0% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
148
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
58.0%
+18.0% vs TC avg
§102
11.1%
-28.9% vs TC avg
§112
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 121 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 without traverse of Group I, in the reply filed on March 18 is acknowledged. Claims 4-5 and 8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on March 18. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bruno (U.S. Patent No. 5,776,239, 1998). Regarding claim 1, Bruno discloses particles having a rutile structure (Bruno, Col. 13, line 28 - Col. 14, line 15), comprising: a core including tin and titanium (Bruno, Col. 14, lines 1-3, white powder is mostly rutile; Col. 13, lines 61-65, particles contain tin), a shell including titanium (Bruno, Col. 14, lines 1-3, white powder is mostly rutile, and there is no reason to expect that the surface would not include titanium), wherein a crystallite diameter of the particles is about 15 nm (Bruno, Col. 14, lines 1-3), the particles contain about 96% by weight of titanium oxide in terms of TiO2 (Bruno, Col. 13, lines 61-65, tin-doped titanium dioxide having a SnO-2 content of about 4%, implying 96% TiO2), the particles contain about 4% by weight tin oxide in terms of SnO2 (Bruno, Col. 13, lines 61-65). Bruno does not explicitly teach that a proportion of tin in the core is 0.1-6.5 at% and that a proportion of tin in the shell is less than 0.1 at%. However, the instant Specification teaches that, in tin-doped titanium dioxide nanoparticles, when there is a sufficient amount of tin for the particles to be rutile-phase, the shell does not contain tin (Specification, [0014], Table 3). The shell of Bruno’s particles would therefore necessarily have less than 0.1 at% tin. In addition, where the instant Examples teach SnO2-doped rutile TiO2 nanocrystallites similar to Bruno’s (Instant Specification, Tables 1-3, Examples 1-6, 94-99.7% TiO2), the core has 11% by mass of SnO2 (Instant Specification, Table 1), which corresponds to 6.2 at% tin on a metals basis. Therefore, a proportion of tin in the core of Bruno’s particles necessarily falls within the claimed range of 0.1-6.5 at% tin. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY J. BAUM whose telephone number is (571)270-0895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00. 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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3590. 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. /ZACHARY JOHN BAUM/Examiner, Art Unit 1736 /ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 24, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12673877
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SPHERICAL PARTICLE MATERIAL
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12662719
PROCESSES FOR THE RECOVERY OF URANIUM
3y 10m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12655027
COMPOSITE AMMONIUM DIURANATE GEL PARTICLES WITH A PHENOLIC RESIN PHASE, AND METHODS OF MAKING THE SAME
3y 2m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12637362
PROCESS FOR PREPARING BATTERY GRADE METAL SULPHATE SOLUTIONS
3y 2m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12636605
INDUSTRIAL AIR POLLUTION REMOVAL SYSTEM
2y 11m to grant Granted May 26, 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
81%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+15.9%)
2y 11m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 121 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