Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/596,205

AIR RINSING APPARATUS AND SYSTEMS FOR RINSING CONTAINERS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Sep 19, 2024
Examiner
LEE, DOUGLAS
Art Unit
1714
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Illinois Tool Works Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
44%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
59%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 44% of resolved cases
44%
Career Allow Rate
286 granted / 649 resolved
-20.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
683
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
56.1%
+16.1% vs TC avg
§102
11.3%
-28.7% vs TC avg
§112
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 649 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Claims 1-12 are pending. 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 1-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,919,055 to Feldmann et al. (the ‘055 patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following: As to claim 1, the ‘055 patent discloses an air rinsing apparatus, comprising: a first enclosure having a first inlet port and a first output port; a second enclosure extending in a first direction within the first enclosure, the second enclosure comprising a second inlet port and a second output port, the second output port disposed on a same face of the first enclosure as the first inlet port, wherein the second output port comprises an air knife, wherein the first inlet port and the second output port are aligned in the first direction; one or more air movers configured to: urge first air into the second inlet port, the second enclosure configured to direct the first air from the second inlet port to the second output port; and pull second air from the first output port, the first enclosure configured to direct the second air from the first inlet port to the first output port; and an ionizer disposed within the second enclosure, the ionizer comprising a high voltage wire, a ground wire, and a reference wire each extending in the first direction along a length of the second enclosure adjacent the second output port, and the ionizer configured to generate positive and negative ions, the second enclosure configured to direct the first air from the second inlet port to the second output port such that the first air entrains the positive and negative ions (see the ‘055 patent claim 1 disclosing the air rinsing apparatus and claim 8 disclosing that the second output port can comprise an air knife). As to claim 2, the ‘055 patent discloses that the first inlet port is tapered to accelerate the second air entering the first inlet port (see the ‘055 patent claims 4 and 5 disclosing a frustum-shaped opening). As to claim 3, the ‘055 patent discloses that the air knife can directs the positive and negative ions through a smaller base of the first inlet port (see the ‘055 patent claims 4-6). As to claim 4, the ‘055 patent discloses that the first enclosure can comprise a first face, the first inlet port and the second output port being on the first face, and the air rinsing apparatus further comprising an extension plate positioned co-planar with the first face (see the ‘055 patent claim 7). As to claim 5, the ‘055 patent discloses that the one or more air movers can be configured to urge the first air by providing positive air pressure to the second inlet port (see the ‘055 patent claim 9). As to claim 6, the ‘055 patent discloses that the one or more air movers can be configured to pull the second air by providing negative air pressure to the first output port (see the ‘055 patent claim 10). As to claim 7 , the ‘055 patent discloses a container rinsing system, comprising: a feed line configured to direct containers having openings, the feed line configured to direct the containers in a first plurality of rows of containers transverse to a direction of travel of the containers; an air rinsing apparatus disposed adjacent the feed line, the air rinsing apparatus comprising: a first enclosure having a first inlet port and a first output port; a second enclosure extending in a first direction within the first enclosure, the second enclosure comprising a second inlet port and a second output port, the second output port disposed on a same face of the first enclosure as the first inlet port, wherein the second output port comprises an air knife; one or more air movers configured to: urge first air into the second inlet port, the second enclosure configured to direct the first air from the second inlet port to the second output port; and pull second air from the first output port, the first enclosure configured to direct the second air from the first inlet port to the first output port; and an ionizer disposed within the second enclosure, the ionizer comprising a high voltage wire, a ground wire, and a reference wire each extending in the first direction along a length of the second enclosure adjacent the second output port, and the ionizer configured to generate positive and negative ions, the second enclosure configured to direct the first air from the second inlet port to the second output port such that the first air entrains the positive and negative ions (see the ‘055 patent claim 11 disclosing the container rinsing system and claim 8 disclosing that the second output port can comprise an air knife). As to claim 8, the ‘055 patent discloses that the first inlet port can be tapered to accelerate the second air entering the first inlet port (see the ‘055 patent claim 15). As to claim 9, the ‘055 patent discloses that the air knife can direct the positive and negative ions through a smaller base of the first inlet port (see the ‘055 patent claim 16). As to claim 10, the ‘055 patent discloses that the first enclosure can comprise a first face, the first inlet port and the second output port being on the first face, and the air rinsing apparatus further comprising an extension plate positioned co-planar with the first face (see the ‘055 patent claim 17). As to claim 11, the ‘055 patent discloses that the one or more air movers can be configured to urge the first air by providing positive air pressure to the second inlet port (see the ‘055 patent claim 9). As to claim 12, the ‘055 patent discloses that the one or more air movers can be configured to pull the second air by providing negative air pressure to the first output port (see the ‘055 patent claim 10). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-3296. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30pm. 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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at 571-272-1344. 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. /DOUGLAS LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 19, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599941
CLEAN HEAD, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR USE IN CLEANING A FLUID CONDUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603263
APPARATUSES AND TECHNIQUES FOR CLEANING A MULTI-STATION SEMICONDUCTOR PROCESSING CHAMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12569109
DISHWASHER FOR TREATING WASHWARE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565004
ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12557578
SUBSTRATE PROCESSING METHOD AND SUBLIMATION DRYING PROCESSING AGENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
44%
Grant Probability
59%
With Interview (+14.8%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 649 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