Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/723,121

RUBBER SHEET

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jun 21, 2024
Examiner
LE, HOA T
Art Unit
1788
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
COMPAGNIE GÉNÉRALE DES ÉTABLISSEMENTS MICHELIN
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
785 granted / 1080 resolved
+7.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
1125
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
37.3%
-2.7% vs TC avg
§102
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§112
23.2%
-16.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1080 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: Rubber sheet comprising crumb rubber particles . The disclosure is objected to because it is confusing and contradicting the claims. At paragraph 00190, Sample 1 is recited as a control, and sample 2 is “according to the invention”. However, at paragraphs 00193 and 00194, the description is reverse: Sample 1 is recited as “according to the invention” while Sample 2 is recited as “the control” which is described as having “[t]he number of the crumb rubber particles substantially perpendicularly oriented to the longitudinal direction of the Sample 2 was 2.1 times of the number of the other crumb rubber particles not substantially perpendicularly oriented to the longitudinal direction of the Sample 2. Clearly, the “control” Sample 2 appears to produce crumb rubber particles that are substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the rubber sheet, which is supposed to be the invention, not control sample. The disclosure is further objected to because of the acronym “phr” is used without first introducing the full term of the acronym. Appropriate correction is required. 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 6-8 and 14 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. In claim 6, the rubber composition is recited as “based on” a reinforcing filler, which is an additive. The term “based on” means that the composition predominantly comprises the described substance. However, a rubber composition cannot be based on a reinforcing filler because the filler is not the main ingredient in the rubber composition. Changing the term “based” to “comprised” (or words of similar meaning) would obviate this rejection. Claims 7-8 suffer the same deficiency as claim 6 because “plasticizing agent” and “crosslinking system” are additives, not main ingredients in a rubber composition. Claim 14 is indefinite because of the term “preferably”. It is unclear whether the limitations following “preferably” are part of the claim. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-5, 9-13 and 15-19 are allowed. Claims 6-8 and 14 would be allowed in amended to overcome the rejection under 35 112 as discussed above. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior art references of record teach a rubber sheet comprising rubber particles substantially oriented perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the rubber sheet. As shown in the instant specification, without the extra step of repeating the two roller calendering system; or the extra step of stacking, folding and cutting of the rubber sheet, rubber particles in the rubber sheet would not orient in the direction as claimed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOA (Holly) LE whose telephone number is (571)272-1511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 10:00 am to 7:00 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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at 571-272-1490. 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. HOA (Holly) LE Primary Examiner Art Unit 1788 /HOA (Holly) LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 21, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599965
NANOMETRIC COPPER FORMULATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589929
RECYCLABLE BLANKS AND CONTAINERS MADE THEREFROM HAVING CONTROLLED FLUID PERMEABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576611
Nonwoven Fabrics Suitable for Medical Applications
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569885
POWER PLANT BOILER SAND COMPRISING DISCARDED FOUNDRY SAND, USE OF POWER PLANT BOILER SAND, METHOD FOR PRODUCING POWER PLANT BOILER SAND AND APPARATUS FOR PRODUCING POWER PLANT BOILER SAND
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569814
SUPER-WET SURFACE AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
73%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+13.0%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1080 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