Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 14, 2026
Application No. 18/835,043

Black Liquid Crystalline Polymer Composition With Low Dissipation Factor

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Aug 01, 2024
Priority
Dec 29, 2022 — nonprovisional of PCTCN2022143277
Examiner
ROBINSON, CHANCEITY N
Art Unit
1722
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Ticona LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
59%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allowance Rate
778 granted / 1076 resolved
+7.3% vs TC avg
Minimal -13% lift
Without
With
+-13.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1099
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
37.4%
-2.6% vs TC avg
§102
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
§112
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1076 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/29/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-38 are currently pending. Claim Objections Applicant is advised that should claim 1 be found allowable, claim 13 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 706.03(k). 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 31-33 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. Claim 31 recites “ wherein the polymer composition is formed by melt blending a carbon black masterbatch containing the carbon black particles with the liquid crystalline polymer resin”. However, claim 1 recites in part “ wherein a masterbatch consisting of 20wt.% of the carbon particles and 80 wt.% of the liquid crystalline polymer resin exhibits a surface resistivity greater than 1x108 ohms as determined according to ASTM D257-14.” It is not clear if applicants intend that carbon black masterbatch recited in claim 31 to be same as the masterbatch in claim 1 or different masterbatch. Furthermore, it is unclear how 2 different masterbatch can be included in the claimed invention when none of examples include 2 different masterbatch. Also, if the masterbatch in claim 31 and claim 1 are the same then claims 32 and 33 limitations are outside the scope of claim 1. The claims as written are indefinite and unclear. Appropriate correction is required. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-38 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-30 and 34-38 are allowed. The closest prior art, Xiao et al. (CN 114507419 A1) do not explicitly teach a polymer composition comprising a liquid crystalline polymer matrix comprising a liquid crystalline polymer resin and carbon black dispersed within the polymer matrix as instantly claimed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANCEITY N ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-3786. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (8:00 am-6:00 pm; IFP; PHP). 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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3591. 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. /CHANCEITY N ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 01, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Dec 18, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 29, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704776
SUBSTRATE FOR MASK BLANKS AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
3y 2m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12698302
LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE INCLUDING ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUND, ELECTRONIC APPARATUS INCLUDING THE LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE, AND THE ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUND
3y 8m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12687778
GAS-BASED DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANOMETALLIC RESIST IN AN OXIDIZING HALOGEN-DONATING ENVIRONMENT
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12681393
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONDITIONING OPTICAL APPARATUSES
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12675047
CONDUCTIVE POLYMER COMPOSITION, COATED PRODUCT, AND PATTERNING PROCESS
3y 7m 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
59%
With Interview (-13.2%)
2y 6m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1076 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