Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/782,907

LATENT HEAT STORAGE UNIT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 24, 2024
Examiner
ROJOHN III, CLAIRE E
Art Unit
3763
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Shinko Electric Industries Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allow Rate
364 granted / 557 resolved
-4.6% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
583
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
50.8%
+10.8% vs TC avg
§102
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
§112
25.2%
-14.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 557 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 7-9 and 13-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/24/2024. Applicant’s election without traverse of Species C, Figs. 4a-5C, claims 1-6 and 10-12 in the reply filed on 2/18/2026 is acknowledged. 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. 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. Claims 1-6 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraft et al. (US Publication No.: 2023/0140947 hereinafter “Kraft”) in view of Hunt (US Publication No.: 2011/0120669).. With respect to claim 1, Kraft discloses a latent heat storage unit (Fig. 4) comprising: a ceramic part (Para 0021) made of a polycrystalline body (Abstract and Para 0021-0022) and having a closed space formed therein (Fig. 4, housing has enclosed space 10); and a metal part provided in the closed space (Para 0115, storage material can be aluminum-silicon alloy). Kraft is silent to the metal part containing 50% or more silicon by mass. Hunt teaches a metal heat storage part that contains 50% silicon (Para 0038, 50-50 atomic percentage of aluminum and silicon). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the mass percentage of silicon of Kraft to have 50% as taught by Hunt to have a desired melting point temperature with a relatively low cost in materials (Para 0038-0039). With respect to claim 2, Kraft discloses a latent heat storage unit (Fig. 4) comprising: a ceramic part (Para 0021) made of a polycrystalline body (Abstract and Para 0021-0022) and having a closed space formed therein (Fig. 4, housing has enclosed space 10); and a metal part provided in the closed space and containing silicon (Para 0115, storage material can be aluminum-silicon alloy). Kraft is silent to a melting point of the metal part is 1100° C. or higher. Hunt teaches the weight ratios of silicon can vary to have a higher melting temperature of 1100° C. or higher (Fig. 4, 60% and higher Si has 1100° C. or higher melting temperature and Para 0037). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the mass weight of the silicon of Kraft to be at 60% or higher for a melting point of 1100° C. or higher as taught by Hunt to have a desired melting point of a heat storage material with a relatively low cost in materials (Para 0037 and 0039). With respect to claim 3, Kraft and Hunt teach the latent heat storage unit as claimed in claim 2 as discussed above. Hunt also teaches wherein the metal part contains 50% or more silicon by mass (Para 0038, 50-50 atomic percentage of aluminum and silicon). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the mass percentage of silicon of Kraft to have 50% as taught by Hunt to have a desired melting point temperature with a relatively low cost in materials (Para 0038-0039). With respect to claim 4, Kraft and Hunt teach the latent heat storage unit as claimed in claim 1 as discussed above. Hunt also teaches wherein the metal part contains 99% or more silicon by mass (Para 0037 and Fig. 4, 99% and higher Si has over 1200° C. or higher melting temperature). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the mass weight of the silicon of Kraft to be at 99% or higher for a melting point of over 1200° C. as taught by Hunt to have a desired melting point of a heat storage material with a relatively low cost in materials (Para 0037 and 0039). With respect to claim 5, Kraft and Hunt teach the latent heat storage unit as claimed in claim 1 as discussed above. Kraft also discloses wherein the ceramic part contains one or more selected from a group consisting of mullite, aluminum oxide, cordierite, anorthite, sillimanite, silicon nitride, boron nitride, aluminum nitride, a composite of aluminum nitride and boron nitride, silicon carbide, tungsten carbide, boron carbide, molybdenum disilicide, and tungsten disilicide (Para 0021-0022). With respect to claim 6, Kraft and Hunt teach the latent heat storage unit as claimed in claim 1 as discussed above. Kraft also discloses wherein the ceramic part contains a material that generates heat when energized (Para 0021-0022). With respect to claim 10, Kraft and Hunt teach the latent heat storage unit as claimed in claim 2 as discussed above. Hunt also teaches wherein the metal part contains 99% or more silicon by mass (Para 0037 and Fig. 4, 99% and higher Si has over 1200° C. or higher melting temperature). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the mass weight of the silicon of Kraft to be at 99% or higher for a melting point of over 1200° C. as taught by Hunt to have a desired melting point of a heat storage material with a relatively low cost in materials (Para 0037 and 0039). With respect to claim 11, Kraft and Hunt teach the latent heat storage unit as claimed in claim 3 as discussed above. Kraft also discloses wherein the ceramic part contains one or more selected from a group consisting of mullite, aluminum oxide, cordierite, anorthite, sillimanite, silicon nitride, boron nitride, aluminum nitride, a composite of aluminum nitride and boron nitride, silicon carbide, tungsten carbide, boron carbide, molybdenum disilicide, and tungsten disilicide (Para 0021-0022). With respect to claim 12, Kraft and Hunt teach the latent heat storage unit as claimed in claim 2 as discussed above. Kraft also discloses wherein the ceramic part contains a material that generates heat when energized (Para 0021-0022). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAIRE E ROJOHN III whose telephone number is (571)270-5431. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 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, Len Tran can be reached at (571)272-1184. 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. /CLAIRE E ROJOHN III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 24, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604438
MODULE WITH IMPROVED THERMAL COOLING PERFORMANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593555
CERAMIC SUBSTRATE WITH HEAT SINK AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12571292
EXHAUST HEAT RECOVERY FOR A MOBILE POWER GENERATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12575060
COOLING SYSTEM, CABINET, AND DATA CENTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571576
HOT SWAPPABLE PUMP DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
65%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+18.8%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 557 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