Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/839,395

METHOD FOR CONVERSION OF CARBON DIOXIDE INTO A FUEL GAS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 16, 2024
Examiner
VASISTH, VISHAL V
Art Unit
1771
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Dimodi Energy OY
OA Round
2 (Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
966 granted / 1337 resolved
+7.3% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+33.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
1388
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
50.1%
+10.1% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1337 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 . Response to Amendment Applicants’ response filed 2/23/2026 amended claims 1 and 6, and cancelled claims 3, 5 and 7. Applicants’ amendments in light of their arguments are persuasive in overcoming the 35 USC 103 rejection over Mass in view of Erfinder from the office action mailed 11/24/2025; therefore, this rejection is withdrawn. New grounds of rejection necessitated by applicants’ amendments is set forth below. 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. Claims 1, 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR20210142227A (hereinafter referred to as KR ‘227). KR ‘227 discloses a method of converting carbon dioxide to fuel more particularly, to a method for converting a target containing carbon and hydrogen into hydrogen, methane, and carbon monoxide by utilizing carbon dioxide based on a thermochemical process which includes pyrolysis at a temperature ranging from 300 to 900°C (see Abstract and Para. [0010]). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. KR ‘227 and the prior art generally does not disclose the process of claim 1 wherein the alkane feed comprises octacosane as recited in dependent claim 1. Response to Arguments Applicants’ arguments filed 2/23/2026 regarding claims 1-2, 4 and 6 have been fully considered but are moot as the rejections from the previous office action have been withdrawn as discussed above. It is the position of the examiner that the reference discussed above adequately reads on independent claim 1 as instantly recited. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL V VASISTH whose telephone number is (571)270-3716. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-4:30 and 7:00-10:00p. 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, Prem Singh can be reached at 5712726381. 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. /VISHAL V VASISTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 16, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 23, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 11, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 11, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600916
OPEN GEAR LUBRICANT COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595433
ORGANIC PHOSPHORUS COMPOUND, PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR, AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590267
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR PRODUCING BIODIESEL AND PRODUCTS OBTAINED THEREFROM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584076
ENHANCED LUBRICANT COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583024
METHOD FOR DISPOSAL OF PHOTOCURED WASTE BY PHOTOOXIDATION-CATALYTIC PYROLYSIS COUPLING
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.3%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1337 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