Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/694,277

CONTAINER PROVIDED FOR A LIQUID OR VISCOUS SUBSTANCE AND EQUIPPED WITH A VALVE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Mar 21, 2024
Examiner
GRUBY, RANDALL A
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Prp Creation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
289 granted / 463 resolved
-7.6% vs TC avg
Strong +44% interview lift
Without
With
+44.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
492
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
39.0%
-1.0% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
36.3%
-3.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 463 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Status of the Application Claims 1 and 3 have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 03/21/24 has been acknowledged and considered by the Office. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Invention 2 in the reply filed on 11/12/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that: 37 CFR § 1.475 (b) states “[a]n internation or national stage application containing claims to different categories of invention will be considered to have unit of invention if the claims are drawn only to one of the following combinations of categories” and “Applicant’s assert that the examiner’s unity of invention requirement is improper because claims 1-13 are directed to the same category of invention” and “by only reciting claims directed to the “product” category, the pending claims would fall under each combination of combinations (1)-(5) of 37 CFR § 1.475 (b)” and “by qualifying among one of these combinations, 37 CFR § 1.475 indicates that this application will be considered to have unity of invention”. This is not found persuasive because claims 1-13 of the instant application are not drawn to a plurality of categories—they are drawn to a singular category: product. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 2 and 4-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “periphery of the slit” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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 and 3 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. As per claim 1, the limitations “the periphery of the slit” and “the outside” each lacks antecedent basis in the claims. Claim 3 depends from claim 1 and thus inherit the deficiencies thereof. 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. Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by FR 2877325 to Behar et al. All citations in this office to FR 2877325 are made to the attached translation into English of FR 2877325 (FR2877325_MT). As per claim 1, and as the examiner can understand the claim, Behar discloses a container intended to receive a liquid or viscous substance, said container (Fig. 1) comprising a wall (5) and an outlet valve (4), said outlet valve comprising: a membrane (41) arranged in said wall of the container (Fig. 1), the membrane being elastically deformable under the effect of positive pressure of the substance relative to the outside (pg. 11, ln. 4-11), an outer surface of the membrane being in contact with an external environment in the area of at least one first slit (43) formed in a substance removal zone (Fig. 1 & 6b), said at least one first slit being suitable for allowing the discharge of a flow of said substance caused by said positive pressure (pg. 11, ln. 4-11; Fig. 6a-6b), at least one first wall (281) configured to be, in the absence of positive pressure of the substance, in contact with an inner surface of the membrane along at least one first contact line arranged on the periphery of the slit (6a), and configured to allow said inner surface of the membrane to move away from at least part of said at least one first wall in the case of positive pressure of the substance (Fig. 6b), said at least one first contact line forming, in the absence of positive pressure of the substance, at least one first linear sealing zone (Fig. 6a; pg. 11, ln. 4-5). As per claim 3, Behar further discloses said at least one first wall comprises an edge in contact with said inner surface of the membrane in the absence of positive pressure of the substance to form said at least one first contact line (Fig. 6a). Conclusion The prior art made of record in FORM PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Randy Gruby, whose telephone number is (571) 272-3415. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday to Friday between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM. If any attempt to reach the examiner by telephone is unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Paul Durand, can be reached at (571) 272-4459. Another resource that is available to applicants is the Patent Data Portal (PDP). Information regarding the status of an application can be obtained from the (PDP) system. For more information about the PDP system, see https://opsg-portal.uspto.gov/OPSGPortal/. Should you have questions on access to the PDP system, please feel free to contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /R.A.G/Examiner, Art Unit 3754 /PAUL R DURAND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754 January 21, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 21, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600529
PILFERPROOF CAP ASSEMBLY FOR A CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595105
A BEVERAGE CONTAINER, AND A METHOD OF ASSEMBLING A BEVERAGE CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583648
Portable Fluid Tank System with Mounting Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575587
Secure, Easily Manipulated, Manually Operatable Pressure Relief Valve for Use With a Pressurized Food Dispensing System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576423
DISPENSER
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
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+44.0%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 463 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