Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 18/772,510

AIR FILTERING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jul 15, 2024
Priority
Jul 18, 2023 — DE 102023206794.3
Examiner
JONES, CHRISTOPHER P
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Mahle International GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
1042 granted / 1371 resolved
+16.0% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+24.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1392
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
45.9%
+5.9% vs TC avg
§102
27.2%
-12.8% vs TC avg
§112
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1371 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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 1-10 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, it is unclear how “in particular for a vehicle” limits the claimed structure. It is unclear whether or not this is a required limitation. Regarding claim 1, line 7, “the respective electrode assembly” lacks antecedent basis in the claim. It is unclear why “the respective” is being included, rather than “the at least one”. Regarding claim 10, the limitation “the vehicle further comprising an air conditioner provided within the air conditioner” is indefinite. It is unclear what it means for an air conditioner to be within an air conditioner. 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, 5 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shi WO 2020/007549 A1. Regarding claim 1, Shi discloses a filtering system for filtering air, in particular for a vehicle (Abstract), comprising a filter configured to filter particles out of the air (figure 1: filter 1), through which a flow path for the air passes (Abstract), an ionizer, comprising at least one electrode assembly (electrodes 3 and 4), through which the flow path flows upstream of the filter (see figure 1), wherein the respective electrode assembly comprises least one electrode and one counter electrode (electrodes 3 and 4), which are connected to a voltage in order to generate a corona discharge in the air (figures: corona discharge electrodes 4), wherein the ionizer is configured to provide the at least one electrode a negative polarity and the at least one counter electrode a positive polarity in the first operating mode of at least one of the electrode assemblies, wherein the ionizer is configured to give the at least one electrode a positive polarity and the at least one counter electrode a negative polarity in the second operating mode of at least one of the electrode assemblies (claim 1; final paragraph of page 1). Regarding claim 2, Shi discloses that the ionizer is configured such that the polarities of the at least one electrode and counter electrode can be reversed in at least one of the electrode assemblies, such that the electrode assembly can alternate between the first operating mode and second operating mode (page 2, 3rd paragraph). Regarding claim 3, Shi discloses that the ionizer comprises at least one first electrode assembly and at least one second electrode assembly, the ionizer is configured such that the at least one first electrode assembly can be operated in the first mode and the at least one second electrode assembly can be operated in the second mode, or vice versa (see figure 2; page 4, line 33 – page 5, line 3). Regarding claim 5, Shi discloses that the ionizer is configured such that in a first operating state, all of the electrode assemblies are operated in the first mode, and all of the electrode assemblies are operated in the second mode in a second operating state (Abstract). Regarding claim 8, Shi discloses that the at least one electrode assembly and the filter are opposite one another along the flow path (figure 1: “opposite” is given its broadest reasonable interpretation; one in front of the other can be considered “opposite”). Regarding claims 9 and 10, Shi discloses utilizing the filtering system as part of a vehicle’s air conditioning system (column 3, lines 12-13), which implies a heat exchanger. 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. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi WO 2020/007549 A1. Shi is relied upon as above. Regarding claim 7, Shi discloses at least two electrode assemblies, where gas passes in series (see figure 2), but does not disclose parallel assemblies. It nevertheless would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have two electrode assemblies in parallel, for the purpose of additional filtration, as is generally known in the art, and since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B). Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi WO 2020/007549 A1 in view of Hepperle USPA 2022/0339641 A1 Shi is relied upon as above. Regarding claim 4, Shi does not disclose an electric insulator is placed between the first electrode assembly and second electrode assembly in the flow path. Hepperle discloses placing such an insulator between the electrodes for insulating the live parts (paragraph 81; claim 31). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shi to include an electric insulator placed between the first electrode assembly and second electrode assembly in the flow path, as disclosed by Hepperle, to keep the live parts insulated from each other. Regarding claim 6, Shi discloses that the ionizer is configured such that in a combined operating state, the at least one first electrode assembly is operated in the first mode and the at least one second electrode assembly is operated in the second mode, or vice versa (Abstract). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-7383. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST M-F. 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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571)270-7872. 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. /CHRISTOPHER P JONES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 15, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704278
FILTRATION DEVICE AND AIR CONDITIONER
2y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12691404
ADSORBENT BED FOR MERCAPTAN REMOVAL WITH INCREASED HYDROTHERMAL STABILITY
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12685954
AIR CLEANER
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12685963
COMPOSITE SEPARATOR FOR GAS SEPARATION
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12685961
SYSTEM, APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MANAGING HEAT TRANSFER IN POST COMBUSTION (CO2 AND H2S) GAS TREATING SYSTEMS
1y 6m to grant Granted Jul 21, 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
76%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+24.9%)
2y 5m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1371 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