Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 07, 2026
Application No. 18/734,209

OIL-IMPREGNATED NANOPOROUS OXIDE COATING FOR INHIBITING ALUMINUM CORROSION

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jun 05, 2024
Priority
Feb 06, 2018 — provisional 62/627,042 +2 more
Examiner
WITTENBERG, STEFANIE S
Art Unit
1795
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
The Trustees of the Stevens Institute of Technology
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allowance Rate
370 granted / 681 resolved
-10.7% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
742
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
52.4%
+12.4% vs TC avg
§102
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
§112
31.1%
-8.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 681 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Status of Claims Claims 28-55 are pending. Claims 28-47 are withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-27 are cancelled. 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 48-55 in the reply filed on 27 May 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 28-47 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 48-55 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. Choi et al. (US 12,006,583). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Choi et al. disclose a method of forming hydrophobic coating including anodizing… coating said walls… providing said plurality of nanopores…providing said plurality of nanopores…with a filling solution…providing said plurality of nanopores with an exchange fluid…providing said plurality of nanopores with a liquid oil…including said at least some of said nanopores, contain said liquid oil only. Choi et al. disclose the substrate comprising aluminum. The instant claims 48-55 include a metal substrate. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ban et al. “Nano-patterned aluminum surface with oil-impregnation for improved antibacterial performance”, LWT – Food Science and Technology 84, 2017, 359-363. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFANIE S WITTENBERG whose telephone number is (571)270-7594. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 am -4:00 pm EST. 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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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. /Stefanie S Wittenberg/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 05, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12692617
PLATING APPARATUS AND PLATING METHOD
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12692618
SUBSTRATE HOLDER, APPARATUS FOR PLATING, METHOD OF PLATING AND STORAGE MEDIUM
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12686936
COMPOSITION AND METHOD EMBODIMENTS FOR PLATING METAL COATINGS
3y 5m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12680187
PLATING APPARATUS
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12668886
LITHIUM CATION EXCHANGE MEMBRANE FOR WATER ELECTROLYSIS, AND WATER ELECTROLYSIS SYSTEM USING SAME
3y 5m 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
54%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+18.1%)
3y 1m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 681 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