Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 18/962,047

TANK FOR STORING A LIQUEFIED FLUID, ADJUSTING DEVICE, INSTALLATION AND METHOD FOR ASSEMBLING SUCH A TANK

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Nov 27, 2024
Priority
Nov 28, 2023 — FR 2313195
Examiner
VOLZ, ELIZABETH J
Art Unit
3733
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
L'Air Liquide, Société Anonyme pour l'Etude et l'Exploitation des Procédés Georges Claude
OA Round
2 (Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allowance Rate
740 granted / 1109 resolved
-3.3% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
1166
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
42.7%
+2.7% vs TC avg
§102
30.7%
-9.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.4%
-17.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1109 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 . 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 1-8 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. Regarding Claim 1, it is unclear what is meant by “a third-party device”. Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06 II(A), MPEP 2163.06 and MPEP 714.02. The ''disclosure'' includes the claims, the specification and the drawings. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 4/28/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that it is clear what is meant by a third party device. However, claim 1 recites “the box being configured to cooperate with a third party device so as to drive the inner shell and the outer shell in a relative movement one with respect to the other in the direction perpendicular to the main direction”. It is unclear whether the third party device or the connection between the inner and outer shell allows for adjusting coaxial alignment. The specification states the third party device may be a device for adjusting coaxial alignment so it is unclear what structure in the claim is controlling the movement. 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 ELIZABETH J VOLZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm est. 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, NATHAN JENNESS can be reached at (571)270-5055. 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. /E.J.V/Examiner, Art Unit 3733 /ANDREW T KIRSCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 27, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Apr 28, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 05, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12721472
Casing for Omni-Directionally Protecting Baking Tray and Method for Protecting Baking Tray Surface
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12722885
TRASH CAN EASY TO PRODUCE
2y 0m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12692044
DRINKING VESSELS
4y 1m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12690705
Food plate with glass holder and a handle
2y 10m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12680259
Sealing and Locking Valve Box Lid
4y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 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
67%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+18.9%)
2y 9m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1109 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