Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/569,682

MARINE MATERIAL AND PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 13, 2023
Examiner
MCKINNON, LASHAWNDA T
Art Unit
1789
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Nichimo Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
53%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 53% of resolved cases
53%
Career Allow Rate
388 granted / 734 resolved
-12.1% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+31.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
80 currently pending
Career history
814
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.8%
+13.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.8%
-18.2% vs TC avg
§112
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 734 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 . 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. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim (KR101149833) in view of Xu et al. (CN112048162). Regarding claims 1-5, Shim teaches a method for producing a marine material and a marine material (including a twisted yarn) comprising forming a constituent element wherein the constituent element comprises a resin consisting essentially of polylactic acid and polybutylene adipate terephthalate with the weight ratio of polylactic acid to polybutylene adipate terephthalate in the resin forming the constituent element being in the claimed range as 3-80% PLA and 70-20% PBAT [0011-0037]. Shim is silent regarding the claimed end capping agent. However, Xu et al. teach using an end-capping agent (terminator) in a polyester composition comprising PLA and PBAT in order to seal the polymer, preventing the polymer from being over-chained, causing the molecular weight distribution to become wider or cross-linked, thereby improving the uniformity of the polymer molecular chain and making the material performance more stable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the end capping agent of Xu et al. in Shim in order to seal the polymer, preventing the polymer from being over-chained, causing the molecular weight distribution to become wider or cross-linked, thereby improving the uniformity of the polymer molecular chain and making the material performance more stable and arrive at the claimed invention. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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 SHAWN MCKINNON whose telephone number is (571)272-6116. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday generally 8:00am-5:00pm 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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. /Shawn Mckinnon/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 13, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 13, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 12, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595597
FLEXIBLE, HIGH TEMPERATURE RESISTANT, FLUID RESISTANT, ABRASION RESISTANT, MULTILAYERED WRAPPABLE TEXTILE SLEEVE AND METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583782
OPTICAL FIBER PREFORM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584248
POLYAMIDE 46 MULTIFILAMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584276
ARTIFICIAL TURF STRUCTURE HAVING IMPROVED BUFFERING PERFORMANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577706
Lyocell fibers and methods of producing the same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
53%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+31.3%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 734 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