NUCLEAR MATERIALS APPARATUS AND IMPLEMENTING THE SAME

Application No. 18/886,245

• Filed: Sep 16, 2024
• Priority: May 04, 2015 — provisional 62/156,604
  • Mar 22, 2016 — provisional 62/311,540
  • May 04, 2016 — nonprovisional of PCTUS2016030809
  • Jul 01, 2016 — provisional 62/357,603
  • Mar 16, 2017 — nonprovisional of PCTUS2017022648
  • Jun 30, 2017 — continuation of 10/410,756
  • Oct 31, 2017 — CIP of 10/854,346
  • Nov 03, 2017 — provisional 62/581,229
  • May 10, 2018 — provisional 62/669,665
  • Jun 07, 2018 — provisional 62/681,731
  • Sep 11, 2018 — provisional 62/729,482
  • Sep 20, 2018 — continuation of 10/515,730
  • Oct 30, 2018 — continuation of 10/714,223
  • May 09, 2019 — CIP of 11/282,615
  • Jun 07, 2019 — CIP of 11/043,312
  • Jul 24, 2019 — CIP of 11/081,248
  • Sep 11, 2019 — CIP of 10/878,973
  • Nov 21, 2019 — CIP of 10/861,612
  • Jun 12, 2020 — CIP of 16/900,820
  • Oct 27, 2020 — continuation of 11/715,575
  • Jun 29, 2023 — continuation of 12/100,525
• Examiner: MASKELL, MICHAEL P
• Assignee: Holtec International
• OA Round: 1 (Non-Final)

Office Action

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 .
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-20 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12,100,525. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.

Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL P MASKELL whose telephone number is [phone]. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10A-6P.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.

/MICHAEL MASKELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878 30 September 2026

Prosecution Timeline

• Sep 16, 2024: Application Filed
• Oct 05, 2026: Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)