Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/729,255

A REACTOR

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jul 16, 2024
Priority
Jan 24, 2022 — TÜ 2022/000837 +1 more
Examiner
BERMAN, JASON
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Tobb Ekonomi Ve Teknoloji Universitesi
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 2m
Est. Remaining
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allowance Rate
589 granted / 923 resolved
+3.8% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
942
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
64.0%
+24.0% vs TC avg
§102
18.1%
-21.9% vs TC avg
§112
14.8%
-25.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 923 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . DETAILED ACTION Status of the Claims Claims 1-16 are pending in the current application. 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 1-16 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. Regarding claim 1, the phrase "especially in" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Although the phrase is in the preamble, it is still unclear whether the subsequent language is required for the claim. Regarding claim 2, the phrase "especially to" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Although the phrase is in the preamble, it is still unclear whether the subsequent language is required for the claim. Regarding claim 5, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Although the phrase is in the preamble, it is still unclear whether the subsequent language is required for the claim. Claim 5 recites the limitation "the environment". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 6 recites the limitation "the other end". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 9-10 recites the limitation "the end of the chamber". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 recites the limitation "the long surface", “the materials”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. Claim 15 recites the limitation "the work required”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. Claim 16 recites the limitation "the bearings”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. All other claims are rejected for their dependence, directly or indirectly, upon claim 1. 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. Claim(s) 1, 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhu (US 20180019468). As to claim 1, Zhu discloses a cvd reactor comprising: A chamber for CVD capable of rotating clockwise or counterclockwise along its axis and mixes substances therein by gravity and rotation (paragraph 44; CVD tumbler reactor; figure 1: tumbler reactor 106 with gear 115 and motor 120 for rotation along longitudinal axis and allowing mixing of powder materials within); A heater comprising a first and second parallel body to provide heat and/or cool the chamber positioned between the first and second bodies (paragraph 44: heating and cooling control by elements 108/110; figure 1: parallel heating elements 108 and 110 above/below the tumbler chamber 106). As to claim 14, Zhu discloses steps extending from a longitudinal/long side direction vertically to stop material movement (figure 4a-c: fins 402 to ‘catch’ material during rotation). As to claim 15, Zhu discloses an engine to produce work required for rotation (figure 1: motor 120 [engine] to gear 115 to rotate chamber 106). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 2-3, 5, 7-13, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Burrows (US 20230132290). As to claim 2, Zhu discloses a tumbler for CVD deposition and surrounding heater, but is silent as to a handle to move the first body. Burrows discloses a rotatable CVD reactor which is surrounded by a first and second movable heater body, movable towards and away from each other (figure 2b, 6: CVD reaction chamber 210 with heating bodies 324, 322 in ‘clamshell’ arrangement), the movement facilitated by a handle (figure 9b: showing handle for movement of arcuate segments). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a handle, as disclosed by Burrows, in the system of Zhu, because this helps facilitate movement of the heating segments towards and away from each other to access the reactor. As to claim 3, Burrows discloses a hinge between the first and second heating body (figure 6: hinge 326). As to claim 5, Burrows discloses insulating elements to preserve the heat created inside the heater and prevent transfer to the outside (figure 6: heat shield 340 on outer surface of heating bodies). As to claim 7, Burrows discloses the first and second heating bodies form a semicircle and contact each other to form an opening in a circular form (figure 6: showing ‘clamshell’ semicircle heating bodies 324,322 which close to form a circular opening surrounding chamber 210). As to claim 8, Burrows discloses the chamber comprises a first and second flange, a lock and at least one step (figure 7: showing first and second flanges 272 at each end of reactor 210, and endplate 280 with clamp 274 [lock] covering the flange and opening, and a further flange [step shaped] structure 230a between endplate and inlet tubing 230). As to claims 9-10, Burrows discloses the flanges at the ends of the chamber for opening/closing the chamber (figure 7: end flanges 272 for sealing and opening chamber 210 with respective cover plates 280 and 282). As to claim 11-12, Burrows discloses a holes in the flanges for material passage to and from the chamber interior (figure 7: apertures 284 to inlet and outlet tubes 220c/230c). As to claim 13, Burrows discloses locks at the flanges to hold together the chamber and flange (figure 7: clamp rings 274 on flanges 272 for holding chamber and flanges with cover plates 280/282). As to claim 16, Burrows discloses a motor for rotation with a mechanical seal and bearings for rotation of the chamber (paragraph 4, paragraph 49). Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu. As to claim 4, Zhu discloses a rotatable reaction chamber and surrounding heater, but is silent as to the specific electronic or mechanical mechanisms for operation or control of the system heating and rotating units. Automating manual activities are generally held within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 III) and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a button on the system for control of operation of the system. Correspondence Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON BERMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5265. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday 8-4. 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, James Lin can be reached on (571) 272-8902. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JASON BERMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 16, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12747499
AN ATOMIC LAYER DEPOSITION APPARATUS
3y 5m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12729425
ROTARY CATHODE END BLOCK
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12719028
SUBSTRATE PROCESSING DEVICE
3y 4m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12719023
SURFACE TREATMENT APPARATUS
2y 1m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12703908
SURFACE TREATMENT APPARATUS AND SURFACE TREATMENT METHOD
3y 6m to grant Granted Aug 11, 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
64%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+21.0%)
3y 4m (~1y 2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 923 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