Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/759,780

TREATMENT SOLUTION AND TREATMENT METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 28, 2024
Examiner
FIGUEROA, JOHN J
Art Unit
1763
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Tohoku University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
902 granted / 1087 resolved
+18.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
1111
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
36.6%
-3.4% vs TC avg
§102
31.9%
-8.1% vs TC avg
§112
13.8%
-26.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1087 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 Applicant's claim of priority under 35 U.S.C.§120 as a continuation of US Serial No. 17/024,783 filed Sept. 18, 2020, which is a continuation of Japanese application PCT/JP2018/039733 filed Oct 25. 2018, and which claims foreign priority to Japanese application JP-2018-055615 filed March 23, 2018, is hereby acknowledged. Election/Restriction Applicant’s election, without traverse, of Group I (claims 1-8) in the reply filed on Nov. 10, 2025, to the restriction requirement dated Sept. 10, 2025, is hereby acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 1-8 have been examined in the instant Office action whereas claims 9-14 have been withdrawn from consideration as drawn to a nonelected invention but remain pending with the present application. 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. Claims 1, 3, 4, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) as anticipated by Kitamura (JP 2015-051394 A to Kitamura et al., published March 3, 2015). Kitamura was cited by Applicant in its Information Disclosure Statement filed June 18, 2024 (‘IDS’) and an English translation thereof has been submitted with the IDS. For purposes of this Office Action, the Examiner will be relying on this English translation submitted by Applicant. Kitamura discloses an exhaust gas treatment method of treating a cyclic silane that enables gases generated in facilities that handle cyclic silane compounds to be efficiently/safely removed, wherein the gas can contain silane halides and silane halogenides as “waste” products of silicon and halogen compounds, and provide cyclic silanes in industrial applications, wherein the cyclic silane can be a halosilane produced from a reaction of a silane with a polyamine, such as “pedeta”, wherein the method includes contacting the cyclic silane (containing silicon) with a basic treatment solution having an inorganic base to obtain a mixture of the cyclic silane and the treatment solution that becomes easily removable into the atmosphere ([0001]; [0003]; [0004]; [0007]; [0009]; [0010]; [0012] to [0015] of Kitamura). Kitamura further teaches that the cyclic halosilane can comprise a cyclic chlorosilane (comprises silicon bond) and that the alkali component of the alkaline basic solution is not limited, wherein examples of the alkaline base for the basic treatment solution can include a sodium/potassium carbonate, a sodium/potassium hydroxide or calcium carbonate as the alkali compound ([0017]; [0023]; [0024]; Examples, particularly, [0029] and [0031] to [0033] of Kitamura). Thus, the instant claims are anticipated by Kitamura. 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. Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as unpatentable over Kitamura. Kitamura was discussed above in the instant action. Kitamura does not provide an example wherein the alkaline component contains the compounds recited in dependent claims 5 and 6. However, as discussed above, Kitamura teaches that any alkaline base compound can be used in the alkaline solution used for the treatment step. That is, as long as the alkaline compound provides a basic solution having a fluid pH greater than 7, the compound would be a suitable alkali base compounds for Kitamura’s treatment solution. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art at the time of filing to select any alkali base compound for the alkaline treatment fluid/step. “The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more that yield predictable results.” KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395. If a person of ordinary skill can implement a predictable variation, §103 bars its patentability. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d at 1396. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-96 (Sup. Ct. 2007) Thus, present claims 5 and 6 are unpatentable over Kitamura. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 2 is objected to as 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. Kitamura does not teach or suggest it treatment method further including performing an ultrasonic treatment on the resultant mixture, as recited in present dependent claim 2. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN J FIGUEROA whose telephone number is (571)272-8916. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am -6:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JOSEPH DEL SOLE can be reached on 571-272-1130. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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. 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. /JOHN J FIGUEROA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763 March 1, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 28, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599800
PROCESSES FOR REMOVING PERFLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES AND REGENERATING AN ADSORBENT USED WITH SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599867
Fully Automated Direct Air Capture Carbon Dioxide Processing System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595186
Method for Preparing Cuprous Chloride by High-value Utilization of Chloride Ion-containing Wasterwater
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590241
MODIFIED SILICA NANOPARTICLE AND METHODS OF SYNTHESIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583742
Hydrogen Production and Carbon Sequestration via High Temperature Cracking of Natural Gas In An Inductively Heated Fluidized Carbon Particle Bed
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
83%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+8.7%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1087 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