Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/653,297

ORIGINAL ECOLOGICAL BAMBOO FIBERS, PREPARATION METHOD AND APPLICATION THEREOF

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
May 02, 2024
Priority
Mar 18, 2024 — CN 202410306472.3
Examiner
CALANDRA, ANTHONY J
Art Unit
1748
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Jiyang College Of Zhejiang A&F University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allowance Rate
654 granted / 1038 resolved
-2.0% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1089
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
86.1%
+46.1% vs TC avg
§102
4.9%
-35.1% vs TC avg
§112
6.1%
-33.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1038 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
Detailed Office Action The communication dated 5/19/2026 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 1-9 are pending with claim 9 withdrawn from consideration. 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 5/19/2026 is acknowledged. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-6 and 8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The term “thin-layer” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “thin-layer” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Claims 2-8 depend from claim 1 and are similarly rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 CN108277673B ZHANG et al, hereinafter ZHANG As for claim 1, ZHANG peels bamboo into sheets and then slices it [abstract]. The sheets are then pressed [abstract]. Subsequently the bamboo is pulped in a degradation tank with enzymes. The bamboo pulp from the degradation tank is subjected to friction grinding and pressing [abstract]. The pulp is further cleaned with a sieve and then squeezed and dried [embodiment 3, claim 6]. 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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG in view of CN102206873A YAO et al., hereinafter YAO. As for claim 7 ZHANG discloses post processing including dehydrating. ZHANG did not disclose oiling, secondary dehydrating, drying opening and carding. YAHO discloses oiling the fiber [0054], drying the fiber (secondary dehydration/drying) , hackling the fiber (opening)n and carding the fiber [abstract, 0056]. At the time of the invention it would be obvious to apply the post-treatments of bamboo of YAO to the fiber of ZHANG. The person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to obtain soft orderly and uniform fiber having good spinnability [abstract]. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY J CALANDRA whose telephone number is (571)270-5124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:45 AM -4:15 PM. 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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at (571)270-7457. 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. ANTHONY J. CALANDRA Primary Examiner Art Unit 1748 /Anthony Calandra/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 02, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12680232
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING A BARRIER FILM, AND A BARRIER FILM
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680228
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR THE REMOVAL OF NON-PROCESS ELEMENTS FROM ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR ASHES IN A KRAFT PULP PROCESS
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12655582
HYGROMORPHIC COMPOSITE MATERIAL
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12637807
DISPERSION DEVICE AND ACCUMULATION DEVICE
2y 3m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12630976
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TREATING MIXTURES OF LIQUIDS AND SOLIDS
2y 8m to grant Granted May 19, 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
63%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+17.9%)
2y 11m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1038 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