Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/895,866

ADSORPTION UNIT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 25, 2024
Priority
Sep 26, 2023 — provisional 63/540,640
Examiner
CLEMENTE, ROBERT ARTHUR
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Delta Electronics Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
1083 granted / 1338 resolved
+20.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1363
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
39.8%
-0.2% vs TC avg
§102
28.6%
-11.4% vs TC avg
§112
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1338 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 3, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent No. 2,303,332 to Dauphinee (hereinafter referred to as Dauphinee). In regard to claim 1, as shown in figures 1 – 7, Dauphinee discloses an adsorption unit. The adsorption unit includes a frame (F), which is made up of upper and lower bars (1, 2,) and channel bars (3, 4), having an inlet side and an exhaust side. The adsorber cells (C) are made up of cylindrical shells (13) that can be considered to form a plurality od spacer tubes. The spacer tubes (13) are arranged in the frame (F). As shown in figure 7, each of the spacer tubes includes a lateral side defined with a plurality of through holes (14). As discussed in column 2 lines 63 – 68, each of the cells can be filled with activated carbon granules, which form a plurality of adsorption granules arranged in the frame. These adsorption granules are restricted by the spacer tubes (13) to be fixed in the frame between the inlet side and the exhaust side. In regard to claim 3, each of the spacer tubes (13) includes a second space defined therein. The adsorption granules are located inside of the spacer tubes in this second space. In regard to claim 8, the spacer tubes (13) are fixed in the frame (F). Each of the spacer tubes (13) has two ends connected to the frame, respectively. In regard to claim 9, as shown in figures 1 – 5, the spacer tubes (13) are substantially parallel to each other and separated from each other. 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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dauphinee. Dauphinee is discussed above in section 3. Dauphinee is silent on the material used to form the spacer tubes. Thus, Dauphinee does not disclose the spacer tubes being made of aluminum or an alloy thereof. Dauphinee describes the frame to have metallic bars, see column 2 lines 46 – 48. There is no evidence the material used to form the spacer tubes is critical. Predictably, if the frame can be metallic, the spacer tubes could also be metallic. Aluminum is a well-known metal that can be formed into many different products. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dauphinee to form the spacer tubes from aluminum or an alloy thereof as this is well known material that predictably can be formed into a tube shape with a plurality of perforations or through holes. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2 and 4 – 7 are 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Other prior art references listed on the PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited) are considered to be of interest disclosing similar adsorption units. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert Clemente whose telephone number is (571)272-1476. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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, Benjamin Lebron can be reached at 571-272-0475. 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 CLEMENTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12702949
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PURIFYING HYDROGEN, AND SYSTEM FOR PRODUCING HYDROGEN BY WATER ELECTROLYSIS
2y 2m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12678724
FILTER MATERIAL FOR AIR FILTER AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING FILTER MATERIAL
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12673290
DRYER FOR COMPRESSED GAS, COMPRESSOR INSTALLATION PROVIDED WITH A DRYER AND A METHOD FOR DRYING COMPRESSED GAS
4y 5m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673876
SYSTEMS & METHODS FOR AMMONIA RECOVERY, ACID GAS SEPARATION, OR COMBINATION THEREOF
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12654122
ZIGZAG-FOLDED NONWOVEN MATERIAL
3y 8m to grant Granted Jun 16, 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
81%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+7.2%)
2y 5m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1338 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