Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/653,709

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DETECTING ANTIMICROBIAL SURFACE COATINGS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 02, 2024
Examiner
PROCTOR, CACHET I
Art Unit
1712
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
B/E Aerospace, Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
814 granted / 1058 resolved
+11.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
1083
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
47.7%
+7.7% vs TC avg
§102
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§112
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1058 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 . 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(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lixil Corp (JP 5881236). As to claim 1, Lixil discloses a system comprising a substrate surface; an antimicrobial system disposed on the surface comprising an antimicrobial compound having a cationic group on one end of a hydrocarbon chain and a silane group on a second end, opposite the first end; and a device at least in communication with the surface to measure the resistance of the antimicrobial system (see 0030-34). Lixil discloses the use of octadecyldimethyl (3-trimethoxysilylpropyl) ammonium chloride (See 0028). Lixil states the methoxysilyl group reacts with the methachloroxy group of the adhesion promoter to ensure adhesion of the material to the resin surface (see 0007, 0015 of the translation). PNG media_image1.png 410 1876 media_image1.png Greyscale 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. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lixil Corp (JP 5881236) as applied to claim 1 above in view of Ohlhausen et al. (US 6994890). The teachings of Lixil Corp as applied to claim 1 are as stated above. Lixil Corp fails to teach the substrate is part of an aircraft as required by claim 3. Ohlhausen et al. discloses the use of cationic quaternary ammonium organosilane based antimicrobial treatments for surfaces (see abstract, col. 2, lines 45-53). Ohlhasuen et al. states the treatment can be applied to a various substrates such as those made metals, glass, plastics, rubbers, resins, etc. that are everyday surfaces such as those found in aircrafts (see abstract, col. 6, line 37-61) and those used for cooking, eating, drinking, bathing, and showering. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the aircraft substrate in the system of Lixil Corp. One would have been motivated to do so since both are directed to the application of an antimicrobial agent to surfaces where Ohlhausen et la. further shows an aircraft as a substrate (sink) that can be used with such agents, and it would be beneficial to measure the resistance of such coatings to make sure the aircraft has the desired resistance to bacteria and viruses to maintain a healthy environment. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lixil Corp (JP 5881236) as applied to claim 1 above in view of Man et al. (CA3031505). The teachings of Lixil Corp as applied to claim 1 are as stated above. Lixil Corp fails to teach the antimicrobial system comprises an anionic surfactant by claim 3. Man et al. discloses activated and inactivated compositions that comprise of ammonium compounds with anionic surfactants (see abstract). Man et al. states activated antimicrobial compositions comprising a quaternary ammonium compound and an anionic surfactant to enhance the surface activity of the substrate (see pages 1-3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Lixil Corp to include an anionic surfactant in the antimicrobial system as taught by Man et al. in order to enhance the antimicrobial activity on the surface of the substrate. Conclusion 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 Cachet I Proctor whose telephone number is (571)272-0691. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-3 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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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. /CACHET I. PROCTOR/ Examiner Art Unit 1712 /CACHET I PROCTOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 02, 2024
Application Filed
May 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 02, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 23, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 23, 2025
Notice of Allowance
Jan 21, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599322
METHOD FOR AN ANALYTE SENSOR COVER-MEMBRANE PREPARATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599922
System and Method for Liquid Dispense and Coverage Control
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601057
SOAKING AND ESC CLAMPING SEQUENCE FOR HIGH BOW SUBSTRATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604389
PLASMA IRRADIATION APPARATUS AND PLASMA-TREATED LIQUID PRODUCTION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589208
A Lubricating Shuttle
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
77%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+5.7%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1058 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