Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 14, 2026
Application No. 18/720,166

Fastening Apparatus for a Cleaning Device Based on Introducing High-Amplitude Pressure Waves

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 14, 2024
Priority
Dec 17, 2021 — EU 21215632.7 +1 more
Examiner
WILSON, GREGORY A
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Kanadevia Inova AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allowance Rate
984 granted / 1201 resolved
+21.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
1217
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
36.1%
-3.9% vs TC avg
§102
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§112
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1201 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “31” has been used to designate both guide tube and boiler connection piece (page 7, lines 1-5). 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. 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. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “154” has been used to designate both bushes and tension rods. 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. 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. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “190” has been used to designate both cleaning tube and exhaust pipe (page 11, lines 2-5). 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. 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. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "20" and "30" have both been used to designate boiler wall (page 12, lines 12-15). 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. 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. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "29" and "32" have both been used to designate mounting flange. 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. 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. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “29” has been used to designate both mounting flange and receiving flange (page 14, lines 29-32). 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. 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. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 7, line 7 “a series of here three second..” requires correction, On page 10, line 10 “a series of here three second…: requires correction. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 5 depends from Claim 5. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 7-11 and 15 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because they are improperly dependent claims for example, claim 13 depends from claim 15, claim 11 depends from claim 13, claim 9 depends from claim 11, claim 7 depends from claim 9 and claim 15 depends from claim 7. Accordingly, the claims 7-11 and 15 have not been further treated on the merits. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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. Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kendrick et al (GB 2408555). Kendrick et al discloses a fastening device (80, 82, 140) for a cleaning device based on the introduction of high-amplitude pressure waves through a hollow cylindrical nozzle (156) into a boiler (68) to be cleaned through an opening in the boiler wall (24) wherein the fastening device includes a fastening flange (154) configured to fasten a housing body (60) of the cleaning device to the boiler wall (SEE Figure 2), a series of damping units (80, 82) which are arranged at regular angular intervals around the hollow cylindrical nozzle of the cleaning device in the longitudinal axis thereof (SEE page 6, line 20 – page 7, line 8) and are each fastened with one free end to the fastening flange (154) (Figure 2) and the other free end to the housing, the statement of “wherein, when the said high amplitude pressure wave is triggered in the cleaning device, the housing body thereof is resiliently held back in the longitudinal direction away from the boiler and is brought back into the starting position by the damping units” (SEE page 8, lines 21-34) is being regarded as a statement of intended use wherein a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim limitation. In re claim 2, Kendrick et al discloses that the series of damping units (80, 82) are arranged in a concentric manner along the longitudinal direction of the hollow cylindrical nozzle of the cleaning device which is concentric to the opening in the boiler wall and is orthogonal to the boiler axis (page 6, line 36 – page 7, line 8). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 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. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kendrick et al in view of Henderson et al (2009/0229068). Kendrick et al discloses the applicants primary inventive concept as stated above including a fastening device for a cleaning device based on the introduction of pressure waves through a nozzle and further includes a series of damping units for absorbing forces generated by the activation of the pressure waves through the nozzle, however does not specifically recite that the damping units are hydraulic dampers. Henderson et al a similar cleaning system in which high pressure waves are delivered to a boiler wall surface for the purpose of cleaning and further teaches that it was commonly known in the art to include the use of hydraulic dampers for the purpose of absorbing recoil forces. It 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 subject matter pertains to have incorporated hydraulic dampers as taught by Henderson et al for the dampers of Kendrick et al and arrived at the applicants claimed invention for the well known purpose of absorbing recoil forces generated by the pressure wave. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4, 6, 12, 14 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY A WILSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4882. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 7:00am-4:30pm. 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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at 571-272-9059. 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. /GREGORY A WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762 July 20, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 14, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704250
Fire Water Plant I
3y 4m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12674576
STRESS RELIEVING ATTACHMENT OF TUBE TO TUBESHEET, SUCH AS IN A PRESSURE VESSEL SHELL OF A NUCLEAR REACTOR POWER SYSTEM
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12674587
WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM AND TREATING WATER FOR ABATING BACTERIAL GROWTH
3y 5m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12668535
Apparatus and Process For Calcining Feed Material
3y 6m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12669248
Gas Leak Detector in Gas Appliances
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
82%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+6.7%)
2y 9m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1201 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