Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/601,283

CAPSULE AND SYSTEM FOR PREPARING A BEVERAGE BY CENTRIFUGATION IN A BEVERAGE PRODUCTION DEVICE

Final Rejection §DP
Filed
Mar 11, 2024
Examiner
KIM, BRYAN
Art Unit
1792
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Société des Produits Nestlé S.A.
OA Round
2 (Final)
29%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
65%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 29% of cases
29%
Career Allow Rate
95 granted / 332 resolved
-36.4% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+36.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
74 currently pending
Career history
406
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
54.2%
+14.2% vs TC avg
§102
7.7%
-32.3% vs TC avg
§112
29.7%
-10.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 332 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. 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 1-18 (particularly claim 15) are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 (particularly claims 1, 15 and 17) of U.S. Patent No. 11,083,324 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 15 and 17 of the patent recite a system comprising a capsule and beverage preparation machine having the features recited by claim 15 of the instant application. It is noted claim 1 of the patent also teaches all the features of claim 1 of the instant application. Claim 19 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 (particularly claims 1, 16 and 18) of U.S. Patent No. 10,743,706 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 16 and 18 of the patent recite a method comprising a capsule and beverage preparation machine having the features recited by claim 19 of the instant application. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BRYAN KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-0338. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6. 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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached at (571)-270-3475. 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. /BRYAN KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 11, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Jan 09, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Final Rejection — §DP
Mar 26, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 30, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12501905
Dough-Based Food Product and Method of Preparing
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12501906
Dough-Based Food Product and Method of Preparing
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12471603
HIGH PRESSURE PROCESSING OF FOODS AND FOOD SUPPLEMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12465052
SPIRAL CONVEYOR THERMAL PROCESSING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
Patent 12376611
METHOD FOR PRODUCING INSTANT FRIED NOODLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 05, 2025
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
29%
Grant Probability
65%
With Interview (+36.5%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 332 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month