Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/763,889

METHODS TO REMEDIATE SOIL CONTAMINATED WITH POLY- AND/OR PERFLUORO ALKYL SUBSTANCES (PFAS), AND/OR OTHER ANIONIC ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 03, 2024
Examiner
FIORELLO, BENJAMIN F
Art Unit
3678
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Government Of The United States AS Represented By The Administrator Of The U S
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
823 granted / 1116 resolved
+21.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
1147
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
45.4%
+5.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1116 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 . 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) 8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Borden (2011/0139695). With regard to claim 8, Borden discloses a method of mobilizing contaminants sorbed on naturally occurring Al(OH)3 solids comprising: adding alkaline solution onto or into the soil (eg. para 0133) in order to raise the pH of the soil to a range of 9 to 10 (eg. table 5; para 0138), thereby neutralizing the positive electrostatic surface charge on the Al(OH)3 solids in the soil, thus eliminating the ionic immobilization of the anionic contaminants on the Al(OH)3 and freeing the anionic organic contaminants (eg para 0145-0146), and subsequently removing and recovering the anionic contaminant by pumping-and-treating the groundwater (eg. paras 0134, 0151). With regard to claim 10, Borden further discloses calcium hydroxide (para 0017). 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) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borden (2011/0139695) in view of Jones et al. (2023/0113100). With regard to claim 9, Borden discloses the invention substantially as claimed however is silent regarding the contaminants are poly- or perfluoro alkyl substances (PFAS). Jones discloses utilizing high alkaline treatment for PFAS contaminants in soil (eg. para 0031). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Borden and utilize the alkaline treatment with PFAS as taught in Borden, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to remove additional contaminants from the soil. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-7 and 11-13 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the cited prior art, either alone or in any reasonable combination, fails to teach or suggest all the limitations of the independent claim(s). The use of aluminum hydroxide to remediate soil contaminated by PFAS is known such as those taught by Jones et al. (2023/0113100) and RemBond (“PFAS Soil Remediation”). However, the cited prior art lacks adding a soluble aluminum salt to the soil proceeded by adding an alkaline solution onto the soil to precipitate the aluminum hydroxide as required by the independent claim(s) and it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the prior art to achieve applicant’s invention without the benefit of hindsight and applicant’s own disclosure. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN F FIORELLO whose telephone number is (571)270-7012. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00AM-4:30PM 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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571)270-5281. 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. /BENJAMIN F FIORELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678 BF 02/17/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 03, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601135
EDGING INTERFACE FOR A GOLF COURSE BUNKER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601134
COMPOSITION, METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR STABILISING A ROCK MASS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595735
SMART ROCK BOLT DRIVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591100
OPTICAL CABLE LAYING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584304
Sewer System Overflow Prevention Device
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
74%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+7.2%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1116 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