Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 27, 2026
Application No. 18/566,208

PRODUCT FOR PROVIDING MEMBRANE ELEMENTS AND MANUFACTURING METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 01, 2023
Priority
Jun 11, 2021 — DE 10 2021 003 009.5 +1 more
Examiner
KWAK, DEAN P
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Sartorius AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 0m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allowance Rate
393 granted / 670 resolved
-1.3% vs TC avg
Strong +37% interview lift
Without
With
+37.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
84 currently pending
Career history
732
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
36.4%
-3.6% vs TC avg
§102
28.0%
-12.0% vs TC avg
§112
26.7%
-13.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 670 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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, claims 1-11, directed to a product; and species: A. For claim 3, the species in which the membrane layer comprises a porous, absorbent material. B. For claim 4, the species in which the membrane layer has a thickness of about 50 μm to about 200 μm. C. For claim 5, the species in which the carrier film has a thickness of approximately 100 μm to approximately 300 μm. D. For claim 6, the species in which the support layer of the membrane film is releasably coupled to the carrier film by means of adhesive. E. For claim 7, the species in which the adhesive comprises a contact adhesive. F. For claim 11, the species in which a structure forms one or more flow lines for guiding a fluid and/or controlling a fluid flow, in the reply filed on 07/20/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-11 and 15 are being examined. Claim Objections Claims 2-3, 7 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities: capital letter “C” in “Claim”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-7, 9-11 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/a2 as being anticipated by Carrilho et al. (US 2011/0123398 A1). Regarding claim 1, Carrilho teaches: 1. A product comprising: a carrier film (e.g., 1250); and a membrane film at least comprising: a support layer (e.g., 1245); and a membrane layer (e.g., 1240); wherein the membrane film is releasably coupled to the carrier film (see Figs. 12A-12B for example); and wherein the membrane film comprises a plurality of substantially discrete membrane elements (e.g., patterned paper). Regarding claims 2-7, 9-11 and 15, Carrilho teaches: 2. The product according to claim 1, wherein the support layer (1245) is arranged between the carrier film (1250) and the membrane layer (1240, see Figs. 12A-12B for example). 3. The product according to claim 1, wherein the membrane layer comprises a porous, absorbent material (i.e., patterned paper throughout the reference). 4. The product according to claim 1, wherein the membrane layer has a thickness of about 50 μm to about 200 μm (see ¶ 0048 for example). 5. The product according to claim 1, wherein the carrier film has a thickness of approximately 100 μm to approximately 300 μm (see ¶ 0048 for example). 6. The product according to claim 1, wherein the support layer of the membrane film is releasably coupled to the carrier film by means of adhesive (e.g., tape layers 1215, 1225, 1235, 1245). 7. The product according to claim 6, wherein the adhesive comprises a contact adhesive (e.g., tape layers 1215, 1225, 1235, 1245). 9. The product according to claim 1, wherein the membrane elements have an at least partially structured surface (this claim is sufficiently broad to have read on the patterned paper 1240 and the tape layer 1245). 10. The product according to claim 1, wherein the membrane elements have one or more structures in the membrane layer (this claim is sufficiently broad to have read on the patterned paper 1240 and the tape layer 1245). 11. The product according to claim 10, wherein a structure (e.g., aperture) capable of guiding a fluid and/or controlling a fluid. 15. The product according to claim 1, wherein the membrane layer comprises a porous material (see i.e., patterned paper throughout the reference). Claim(s) 1, 4-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/a2 as being anticipated by Dick et al. (US 2015/0233889 A1). Regarding claim 1, Dick teaches: 1. A product comprising: a carrier film (e.g., 130, 154); and a membrane film at least comprising: a support layer (e.g., 120); and a membrane layer (e.g., 122); wherein the membrane film is releasably coupled to the carrier film (see Fig. 7 for example); and wherein the membrane film comprises a plurality of substantially discrete membrane elements (e.g., 140). Regarding claims 4-11, Dick teaches: 4. The product according to claim 1, wherein the membrane layer has a thickness of about 50 μm to about 200 μm (see ¶ 0036 for example). 5. The product according to claim 1, wherein the carrier film has a thickness of approximately 100 μm to approximately 300 μm (see ¶ 0036 for example). 6. The product according to claim 1, wherein the support layer of the membrane film is releasably coupled to the carrier film by means of adhesive (e.g., tapes ¶ 0036). 7. The product according to claim 6, wherein the adhesive comprises a contact adhesive (e.g., tapes ¶ 0036). 8. The product according to claim 6, wherein the adhesive has a layer thickness of about 8 μm to about 20 μm (see ¶ 0036 for example). 9. The product according to claim 1, wherein the membrane elements have an at least partially structured surface (this claim is sufficiently broad to have read on the capillary channels 140). 10. The product according to claim 1, wherein the membrane elements have one or more structures in the membrane layer (this claim is sufficiently broad to have read on the capillary channels 140). 11. The product according to claim 10, wherein a structure (e.g., capillary channels 140) capable of guiding a fluid and/or controlling a fluid. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carrilho et al. (US 2011/0123398 A1) in view of Dick et al. (US 2015/0233889 A1). Regarding claim 8, Carrilho teaches: wherein the adhesive has a layer thickness of about 75 μm (¶ 0048). However, Carrilho does not explicitly teach: 8. The product according to claim 6, wherein the adhesive has a layer thickness of about 8 μm to about 20 μm. See Dick above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the adhesive of Carrilho to have the adhesive has a layer thickness of about 8 μm to about 20 μm as taught by Dick, since selecting a suitable adhesive layer thickness would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (Dick ¶ 0036+). The Court stated in KSR, “[w]hen a work is available in one field of endeavor, design incentives and other market forces can prompt variations of it, either in the same field or a different one”, 550 U.S. at ___, 82 USPQ2d at 1396 (emphasis added), or solves a problem which is different from that which the applicant was trying to solve, may also be considered for the purposes of 35 U.S.C. 103. See MPEP 2141. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEAN KWAK whose telephone number is (571)270-7072. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH, 4:30 am - 2:30 pm EST. 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, CHARLES CAPOZZI can be reached at (571)270-3638. 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. /DEAN KWAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798 DEAN KWAK Primary Examiner Art Unit 1798
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 01, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12728415
GRAVITY FLOW MICRO-PHYSIOLOGICAL ARTICLE AND DETERMINING A PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSE TO A DRUG
4y 10m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12722153
MICROFLUIDIC CHIP, TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT METHOD USING THE SAME, AND ANALYSIS DEVICE USING THE SAME
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12708900
WELLS FOR OPTIMIZED SAMPLE LOADING IN MICROFLUIDIC CHIPS
5y 2m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12681033
REAGENT RESERVOIRS AND RELATED SYSTEMS AND METHODS
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12649151
MANIFOLDS, SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONDUCTING BIOLOGICAL STUDIES UNDER FLOW
3y 8m to grant Granted Jun 09, 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
59%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+37.1%)
3y 10m (~1y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 670 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