Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/684,966

ALL-SOLID-STATE POTASSIUM ION-SELECTIVE ELECTRODE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE ALL-SOLID-STATE POTASSIUM ION-SELECTIVE ELECTRODE

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Feb 20, 2024
Examiner
BALL, JOHN C
Art Unit
1795
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Tokyo University of Science Foundation
OA Round
2 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
1065 granted / 1353 resolved
+13.7% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
1381
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
44.1%
+4.1% vs TC avg
§102
29.0%
-11.0% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1353 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE Summary This Office Correspondence is based on the Response filed with the Office on 2 February 2026, regarding the Takayama, et al. application. Claims 1-4 are currently pending and have been fully considered. 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 Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by a published paper by C. Gabrielli, et al. (“An Electrogravimetric Study of an All-Solid-State Potassium Selective Electrode with Prussian Blue as the Electroactive Solid Internal Contact”, Journal of the Electrochemical Society, 152(12): p. H219-H224, Oct. 2005; hereinafter, “Gabrielli”). Regarding claim 1, Gabrielli discloses an all-solid-state potassium ion-selective electrode (Title) comprising: a conductor (“For the potentiometric measurements a classic gold electrode was used.” 1st ¶, Electrode preparation, p. H221); an insertion material formed on a surface of the conductor (“One of the gold electrodes was immersed into 0.02 M FeCl3, 0.02 M K3[Fe(CN)6], and 0.01 M HCl aqueous solution. Electrodeposits of PB (Prussian Blue) were galvanostatically carried out by applying a controlled cathodic current …”, 1st ¶, Electrode preparation, p. H221); and a potassium ion-sensitive membrane covering the insertion material (“Finally, the PVC membrane was deposited on the gold electrode by spin-coating.”, 2nd ¶, Electrode preparation, p. H221), the insertion material including at least a Prussian blue analog represented by a structural formula KxFe[Fe(CN)6]y·nH20, where x is a numerical number larger than 0 and less than or equal to 2, y is a numerical number larger than 0 and less than or equal to 1, and n is a numerical number larger than or equal to 0 (“At the PB/membrane interface a second ion-exchange phenomenon takes place17 KFeIIIFeII(CN)6 + K+ + e− ↔ K2FeIIFeII(CN)6”, 2nd ¶, Theory, p. H219). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-4 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: No prior art reference anticipates or renders obvious all the limitations of independent claim 2. Thus, claim 2 is allowable. Claims 3 and 4 are allowable by virtue of their dependency to claim 2. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 2 February 2026, regarding the rejection to instant claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant first argues that the Gabrielli reference discloses detection of potassium ion using K3[Fe(CN)6] as an insertion material. However, this assertion is incongruent to the actual text of Gabrielli, which teaches electrodeposits of PB (Prussian Blue) galvanostatically fabricated from a solution of 0.02 M FeCl3, 0.02 M K3[Fe(CN)6], and 0.01 M HCl, not solely utilization of K3[Fe(CN)6]. Therefore, the rejection to claim 1 is maintained. Applicant’s arguments, filed 2 February 2026, with respect to the rejections to claims 2-4 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 2-4 have been withdrawn. Interview with the Examiner If at any point during the prosecution it is believe an interview with the Examiner would further the prosecution of an application, please consider this option. The Automated Interview Request form (AIR) is available to request an interview to be scheduled with the Examiner. First, an authorization for internet communications regarding the case should be filed prior or with an AIR online request. The internet communication authorization form (SB/0439), which authorizes or withdraws authorization for internet-based communication (e.g., video conferencing, email, etc.) for the application must be signed by the applicant or the attorney/agent for applicant. The form can be found at: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf The AIR form can be filled out online, and is automatically forwarded to the Examiner, who will call to confirm a requested time and date, or set up a mutually convenient time for the interview. The form can be found at: https://www.uspto.gov/patent/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html The Examiner encourages, but does not require, interviews by the USPTO Microsoft Teams video conferencing. This system allows for file-sharing along audio conferencing. Microsoft Teams can be used as an internet browser add-on in Microsoft IE, Google Chrome, or Mozilla Foxfire, or as a temporary Java-based application on these browsers. Steps for joining an Examiner setup Microsoft Teams can be found at the USPTO website: https://www.uspto.gov/patents/laws/interview-practice#step3 Additionally, a blank email to the Examiner at the time of a telephonic interview can be used for a reply to easily allow for Microsoft Teams communication. Please note, policy guidelines regarding Internet communications are detailed at MPEP §500-502.3, and office policy regarding interviews are detailed at MPEP §713. 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 JOHN C BALL whose telephone number is (571)270-5119. The examiner can normally be reached on M - F, 9 am - 5:30 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, Luan Van can be reached on (571)272-8521. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /J. Christopher Ball/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 20, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Feb 02, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601705
SENSOR FOR MEASURING IONIZED MAGNESIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601724
WATER ALKALINITY DETECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594557
ISOELECTRIC FOCUSING DEVICES AND FIXTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596089
DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR ANTIMICROBIAL SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596097
OPTICAL ELEMENT DETACHABLE CAPILLARY CLIP AND CAPILLARY ELECTROPHORESIS APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
79%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+16.2%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1353 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