Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 14, 2026
Application No. 18/700,813

UVC Sterilization Chamber

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 12, 2024
Priority
Oct 12, 2021 — provisional 63/254,698 +1 more
Examiner
CONLEY, SEAN EVERETT
Art Unit
1799
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Uvsee Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allowance Rate
645 granted / 916 resolved
+5.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
933
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
42.5%
+2.5% vs TC avg
§102
27.6%
-12.4% vs TC avg
§112
22.6%
-17.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 916 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Objections 2. Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: Method claim 14 presently depends from device claim 8. It appears that claim 14 should properly depend from claim 13 and will be treated as such for examination. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 3. 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. 3. Claim(s) 1, 3, 6-8, 10, 13, 15, 18-20, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shodeen et al. (USPN 5,446,289) in view of Burrows (GB 2473217 A). Regarding claims 1 and 13, Shodeen et al. discloses a process of sterilizing an article using a UVC sterilization device (10) comprising: an inner reactor (space within shell 20) having a UVC reflective surface (22) of highly polished stainless steel (see fig. 1; see col. 3, lines 4-31), said inner reactor comprising a first UVC lamp (80) at a top of the inner reactor and a second UVC lamp (80) at a bottom of the inner reactor (see figure 2; lamps (80) located at the top and bottom of the reactor) and a UVC transparent platform (56) for placing items to be sterilized thereon positioned between the first UVC lamp (top lamp 80) and the second UVC lamp (bottom lamp 80) , said platform (56) comprising a UVC transparent platform (transparent fused silica shelf – see col. 5, lines 17-31); and an outer shell (20) comprising a door (first door (62) or second door (63)) for accessing the inner reactor (see figure 3; col. 5, line 62 to col. 6, line 30). Shodeen et al. does not appear to specifically disclose that the inner reactor has an octagonal shape formed by a plurality of UVC reflective surfaces. However, Shodeen et al. does teach a cylindrical shaped reactor and that the shape of the inner reactor can be other shapes such as squares, rectangles, or other polygons (see col. 4, lines 15-30). Burrows provides a teaching showing that it is well known and conventional to use an octagonal shaped sterilization chamber (2) wherein the internal surfaces are highly reflective in order to provide more efficient germicidal effects from the UVC lamps (6) to the area being treated (see para [0047]-[0048]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to modify the device of Shodeen et al. to make the inner reactor an octagonal shape having UVC reflective surfaces as exemplified by Burrows, in order to provide more efficient germicidal effects from the UVC lamps. Regarding claims 3 and 15, Shodeen et al. further discloses that the UVC lamps (80) are shut off by a safety system when any door is opened during a sterilization cycle (see col. 7, lines 22-33). Regarding claims 6 and 18, Shodden et al. further discloses wherein the at least one UVC lamp (80) is a mercury tube (see col. 1, lines 33-44; col. 4, lines 43-55). Regarding claims 7-8, 10, 19-20, and 22, Shodeen et al. discloses that the sterilizer (10) includes a UVC transparent shelf (56) constructed of fused silica and has a thickness of about 0.25 inches in one embodiment (see figures 1-2; col. 5, lines 17-31). 4. Claim(s) 2 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shodeen et al. in view of Burrows as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Deshays et al. (US 2020/0179543 A1). The combination of Shodeen et al. and Burrows is set forth above with regards to claims 1 and 13. However, the combination does not appear to disclose a microprocessor unit configured for measuring UV light intensity during sterilization and monitoring internal air temperature within the inner reactor. Deshays et al. discloses a system for monitoring and controlling conditions in a UV sterilization chamber in order to precisely control parameters for high level disinfection (see abstract). Specifically, Deshays et al. discloses a microprocessor that is configured to monitor humidity, air temperature and UV radiation intensity within the sterilization chamber (see para [0013]) in order to provide an accurate radiation dose to the article being sterilized (para [0014] and [0059]-[0060]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to modify the device of Shodeen et al. to include a microprocessor configured to monitor and control air temperature and UV radiation intensity within the chamber in order to provide an accurate radiation does to the article being sterilized as taught by Deshays et al. Conclusion 5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kreitenberg et al. (US 2012/0248332 A1) 6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN E CONLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-8414. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8:30am-4pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mike Marcheschi can be reached on 571-272-1374. 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). /SEAN E CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 12, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12691195
TRAY SANITIZATION SYSTEMS AND METHODS
3y 8m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12691192
UV-C STERILIZATION APPARATUS AND METHOD
3y 2m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12685796
DIFFERENTIAL PAIR CIRCUIT FOR EMI NOISE MITIGATION WITH UV TECHNOLOGY
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12678528
AROMATHERAPY APPARATUS
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12660832
Equipment and method for ozone circulation fumigation in grain depot
1y 9m to grant Granted Jun 23, 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
70%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+11.7%)
2y 8m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 916 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