Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/784,997

BINDER FOR MOLDING CASTING MOLD AND COMPOSITION FOR MOLDING CASTING MOLD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 26, 2024
Priority
Aug 14, 2023 — JP 2023-131830
Examiner
VETERE, ROBERT A
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Sintokogio Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 5m
Est. Remaining
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allowance Rate
553 granted / 901 resolved
+1.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
942
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
63.1%
+23.1% vs TC avg
§102
13.4%
-26.6% vs TC avg
§112
17.6%
-22.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 901 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 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 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Polzin et al. (US 2016/0250680). Claim 1: Polzin teaches a binder for molding a casting mold (Abst.), comprising: a solution of water glass including aluminum silicate as an additive (i.e. claimed aluminum silicate dissolved in water glass) (Abst.; ¶¶ 0026, 0030, 0033), wherein the binder comprises, e.g., 3% by weight aluminum silicate (¶ 0083). Claim 3: Polzin teaches that the aluminum silicate is synthetic (¶ 0026). Claim 4: Polzin teaches a composition for molding a casting mold comprising: the binder of claim 1 (as discussed above) and a basic molding material, such as rutile sand (i.e. claimed fireproof inorganic particles) (¶¶ 0037-0038). 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. 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. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Polzin in light of Koch et al. (US 2015/0129155). Claim 2: Polzin does not expressly teach what the solid content of the water glass is. Koch teaches a binder for molding a casting mold comprising water glass and additives (Abst.) and explains that suitable a solid content for the water glass can range from 36-55 wt% (¶ 0053). The simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is prima facie obvious. MPEP § 2143. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP § 2144.05(I). Thus, because Polzin is silent regarding the solid content of the water glass and because Koch teaches that suitable solids contents range from 36-55 wt%, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to have selected 40-55% by mass solid content of the water glass and aluminum silicate combined with the predictable expectation of success. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert A Vetere whose telephone number is (571)270-1864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00 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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at (571) 270-1034. 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. /ROBERT A VETERE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 26, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Sep 14, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 14, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12747494
MASK ASSEMBLY, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING MASK ASSEMBLY, AND METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MANUFACTURING DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 2m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12740935
FIBER-FORMING COMPOSITION
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12721470
PREPARATION METHOD OF LASER TITANIUM KITCHENWARE
1y 5m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12680182
FILM OF GRAPHITIC CARBON NITRIDE FOR PHOTOANODE AND A METHOD FOR FORMING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12674225
GRAPHENE MATERIAL-METAL NANOCOMPOSITES AND PROCESSES OF MAKING AND USING SAME
5y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 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
61%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+12.9%)
3y 7m (~1y 5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 901 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