Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/655,118

DETACHABLE FLIP-STRAW LID

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
May 03, 2024
Examiner
NICOLAS, FREDERICK C
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Hydrojug Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
1024 granted / 1264 resolved
+11.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1299
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
32.4%
-7.6% vs TC avg
§102
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
§112
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1264 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. 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 § 112 2. 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. 3. Claims 6, 8, 12 and 17 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 "generally" in claims 6 and 12 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "one of generally generally: comma shaped, J-shaped, U-shaped, V-shaped, and C-shaped" 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. II- Claim 8 is vague and indefinite because “lid” as recited in line 2, appears to be a double inclusion, at least in part, of the “lid” as recited in claim 1, line 2. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 4. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 5. 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. 6. Claims 1-6, 8-12, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Holt et al. (WO2009/123661). Holt et al. disclose a container lid (104), which comprises a pivotable spout member (110) located on and detachable from a top of the lid; and a set screw member (130) located on and detachable from a bottom of the lid and configured to engage and releasably attach an end of the pivotable spout member to the lid as seen in Figure 14; a body (the interior of element 104) into which the pivotable spout member and set screw member insert as seen in Figure 3; the pivotable spout member having a first end and a second end opposite the first end, the second end having opposing protrusions (111); the body having opposing tracks (recesses) configured to receive and releasably retain the protrusions (page 10, para. [0057]); wherein each of the tracks is curved as seen in Figure 14; wherein each of the tracks is one of generally: U-shaped as seen in Figure 14; wherein the set screw member has a channel configured to allow fluids from a container (102) attached to lid (104) to pass through the set screw member to the pivotable spout member as seen in Figure 14; wherein the channel is configured to connect to a detachable straw member (118) that extends downward from the container lid, a partially rounded second end of the spot member as seen in Figure 14. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 7. 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. 8. Claims 7, 13 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holt et al. (WO2009/123661) in view of McMullin 8,672,174. Holt et al. have taught all the features of the claimed invention except that each of the tracks has a terminal end and an overhanging protrusion adjacent the terminal end. McMullin teaches the use of a pivotable spout member (20’) with protrusions (42), tracks to receive the protrusions as seen in Figure 11, where the tracks have a terminal end and an overhanging protrusion (44) adjacent the terminal end as seen in Figure 11. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the application to modify the tracks of Holt et al. to have the overhanging protrusion of McMullin, in order to prevent the spout from being over rotated beyond the opened position. Conclusion 9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicants' disclosure. 10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FREDERICK C NICOLAS whose telephone number is (571)272-4931. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM -: 4:00 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, Paul R. Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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. /FREDERICK C NICOLAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 03, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Apr 07, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600616
WATER CONTAINER WITH MANUAL DISPENSING VALVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595113
APPLICATION CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588583
Agricultural Machines Having Sectional Control, and Related Systems and Methods
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582100
DISPENSER FOR FORMIC ACID VAPOUR AND METHOD FOR MITE CONTROL IN BEEHIVES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576010
MEDICINE DISPENSING SYSTEM HAVING STAIR-STEP DOSING INDICATORS
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+12.7%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1264 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