Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 14, 2026
Application No. 18/690,180

DISPERSION OF COAL TAR PITCH FOR COATING GRAPHITIC MATERIALS AND USE IN ELECTRODE PRODUCTION

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Mar 07, 2024
Priority
Sep 08, 2021 — provisional 63/241,716 +1 more
Examiner
GREEN, ANTHONY J
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Koppers Delaware Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
1379 granted / 1621 resolved
+25.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 9m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1645
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
33.1%
-6.9% vs TC avg
§102
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
§112
33.4%
-6.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1621 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Response to Preliminary Amendment The preliminary amendment submitted on 02 June 2025 has been entered. After entry of the amendment, claims 41-60 are currently pending in the application. 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 41-60 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-40 of U.S. Patent No. 12,394,787. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims encompass all of the limitations of the claims of the prior patent and are therefore rendered obvious by said claims. The instant claims are of a broader scope than the claims of the prior patent and therefore they fully encompass some of these claims. As for claims 41-44 are rendered obvious by claims 1 and 5 of the prior patent which teaches the same components and the same D50 and D90 sizes. As for claim 45, as the particles are of a micron size it is obvious that they are micronized. As for claims 46-49, this is rendered obvious by claim 3 of the prior patent which recites a range that overlaps or encompasses said range. As for claim 50, this is met by claim 1 of the prior patent. As for claim 51, this is met by claim 2 of the prior patent. As for claim 52, this is met by claim 1 of the prior patent. As for claim 53, this is met by claim 1 of the prior patent. As for claim 54, this is met by claims 25 and 31 of the prior patent. As for claim 55, this is met by claim 28 of the prior patent. As for claim 56, this is met by claim 30 of the prior patent. As for claim 57, this is met by claim 36 of the prior patent. As for claim 58, this is met by claim 37 of the prior patent. As for claim 59, this is met by claims 39 and 40 of the prior patent. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY J GREEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1367. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 6:30-5. 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, Amber R. Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-3149. 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 GREEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731 ajg July 28, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 07, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12703662
BINDER COMPOSITION COMPRISING FINE FILLER AND FINE GROUND GRANULATED BLAST FURNACE SLAG
2y 10m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12686637
HEAT AND FIRE RESISTANT GEOPOLYMER MATERIALS
3y 10m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12686638
BINDER COMPOSITION COMPRISING POZZOLANIC MATERIAL AND FINE FILLER
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12679770
THERMAL INSULATION MATERIAL AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THERMAL INSULATION MATERIAL
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12668543
DRY GRINDING OF STEEL MAKING SLAG, GROUND STEEL MAKING SLAG, AND ITS USE IN CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 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
85%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+13.3%)
1y 9m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1621 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