Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/907,062

POLYCANNABINOIDS FOR COMMODITY POLYMERS AND COMMODITY ELECTRONICS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 04, 2024
Examiner
NGUYEN, TRI V
Art Unit
1764
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Purdue Research Foundation
OA Round
2 (Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
633 granted / 941 resolved
+2.3% vs TC avg
Strong +58% interview lift
Without
With
+57.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
988
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
49.2%
+9.2% vs TC avg
§102
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
§112
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 941 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 Response to Amendment Upon entry of the amendment filed on 17 December 2025, Claim(s) 10-12 and 15-19 are withdrawn and Claim(s) 20 is/are added. The currently pending claims are Claims 1-20. Based on applicants’ remarks, the 102 rejections based on Zheng are withdrawn. However, they are not found persuasive regarding the Sotzing reference and the rejections are maintained. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-9, 13, 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sotzing (US2021/0322365A1, cited in the IDS). Claims 1-9: Sotzing discloses a composition comprising a cannabinoid polymer and zinc (abs, 16, 64, 65, 109-11, 169-173, Table 1 with accompanying text and examples, especially example 14). The Sotzing reference discloses the claimed invention with the feature of the cannabinoid polymer and zinc but does not disclose the composition with the claimed elements with enough specificity to anticipate the claimed invention. Nevertheless, given that Sotzing discloses the cannabinoid polymer and zinc, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the chemical art at the time of the invention to utilize any of the taught components since Sotzing teaches each one and is motivated to select the components based on the desired features of the end-product such as pharmaceutical applications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to pursue the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success since the reference is directed to a similar field of endeavor. It is also noted that the fact that many components are disclosed would not have made any of them, such as the cannabinoid polymer and zinc, less obvious. Here, Sotzing discloses each of the claimed components and there is no evidence nor teaching that the selection of the claimed components would be repugnant to a skilled artisan. Further, obviousness only requires a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143. Claims 1, 6 and 20: Regarding the claimed metal, particle form and oxidizable feature, it is noted that zinc is metal, Sotzing discloses a solid/flaky/crystalline feature, and the oxidizable feature is construed as an inherent property of Zn - thus the claimed limitations are met under BRI (¶104-118 and 155-168). Claims 13 and 14: Sotzing discloses the film application (¶128-141). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 8 and 9, filed 17 December 2025, with respect to Zheng have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 102 rejection has been withdrawn. Applicant's arguments filed 17 December 2025 regarding the Sotzing reference have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Sotzing does not teach the combination of the polycannabinoid with a zinc metal, the particulate form or oxidizable feature (pg. 9-10). Further, Applicant argues the unexpected results as based on example 3 of the specification (pg. 10). The examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that zinc is metal, Sotzing discloses a solid/flaky/crystalline feature, and the oxidizable feature is construed as an inherent property of Zn - thus the claimed limitations are met under BRI (¶104-118 and 155-168). Applicant seems to argue that Zn is in its elemental state; however, the instant claims do not seem to reflect such (narrower) limitation. Regarding example 3, the examiner notes that it is unclear how the unexpected results are exhibited since comparative showings are not provided. Applicant is welcome to provide any evidence that the claimed composition would provide any criticality and/or enhanced benefits. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TRI V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6965. 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, Arrie Lanee Reuthers can be reached at 571.272.7026. 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. /TRI V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 04, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 17, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 11, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594598
COPPER FINE PARTICLE DISPERSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597597
PASSIVATED SILICON-CARBON COMPOSITE MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590052
COMPOSITE MATERIAL, METHOD FOR PREPARING THE SAME, AND LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12577392
Composites Having Improved Microwave Shielding Properties
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570843
SEMI-CONDUCTIVE COMPOUND COMPOSITION AND METHOD FOR PREPARING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+57.9%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 941 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