Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 23, 2026
Application No. 18/985,533

SEALING CAP AND DETACHING METHOD OF SEALING CAP

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 18, 2024
Priority
Dec 28, 2023 — JP 2023-223532
Examiner
ALLEN, JEFFREY R
Art Unit
3733
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Surpass Industry Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 4m
Est. Remaining
75%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allowance Rate
545 granted / 1131 resolved
-21.8% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
1187
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
52.3%
+12.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.7%
-19.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1131 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-6 in the reply filed on 7/21/2026 is acknowledged. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim(s) 1, 2 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Van Bruggen (US-7080749-B2). Van Bruggen discloses: 1. A sealing cap (10) for sealing a plug attached to an opening of a liquid container (Fig. 1), the sealing cap comprising: a body (11) having a cylindrical part (14) and a sealing part (13), the cylindrical part being formed cylindrically along an axis, and the sealing part sealing a top end of the cylindrical part, being arranged along a plane orthogonal to the axis, and being circular in planar view (Figs. 2, 3); an annular part (12) formed annularly about the axis and having an inner diameter that is larger than an outer diameter of the cylindrical part (Fig. 2); a first coupling part (end of 19) coupling the cylindrical part and the annular part to each other at a first coupling position in a circumferential direction about the axis; and a second coupling part (at 23) coupling the cylindrical part and the annular part to each other at a second coupling position in the circumferential direction, the second coupling position being different from the first coupling position (Fig. 5), wherein the body, the first coupling part, and the second coupling part are integrally formed with a resin material (col. 2, lines 63-66), wherein a pair of first grooves (17) extending in a first direction along the axis are formed in an outer circumferential face of the cylindrical part (col. 3, lines 3-6), wherein a pair of second grooves (18) are formed in an outer circumferential face of the sealing part (col. 3, lines 3-6) so as to extend in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction and interpose the axis (Fig. 3, 5), wherein the pair of first grooves are connected to the pair of second grooves (col. 3, lines 3-6), wherein the first coupling position is a position interposed between the pair of first grooves (Figs. 3, 5), and wherein the second coupling position is another position not interposed between the pair of first grooves (Fig. 5). 2. The sealing cap according to claim 1, wherein the annular part includes an annular member coupled to the cylindrical part by the first coupling part and arranged at a first position in the first direction (Fig. 5), a grip member (25) arranged at a second position in the first direction, and a pair of connecting members connecting the annular member and the grip member to each other (each half of 12), and wherein the second position is a position closer to a plane than the first position, the sealing part being arranged on the plane (Figs. 3, 5; depending on the plane). 4. The sealing cap according to claim 1, further comprising a third coupling part (23) coupling the cylindrical part and the annular part to each other at a third coupling position different from the first coupling position in the circumferential direction, wherein the second coupling position and the third coupling position are the same positions in the second direction and different positions in a third direction orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction (Fig. 5). 5. The sealing cap according to claim 2, wherein in the first direction, the first grooves are formed upward from a third position to a position connected to the second grooves, the third position being above the first position, and wherein in the first direction, a pair of cutout is connected to the pair of first grooves are formed in the cylindrical part downward from the third position to the bottom end of the cylindrical part (Fig. 3). 6. The sealing cap according to claim 1, wherein a protruding part (15) configured to be secured to the plug is formed to an inner circumferential face of the cylindrical part. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Bruggen (US-7080749-B2) in view of Buermann (US-20160123496-A1). Bruggen discloses all the claimed limitations as shown above but fails to teach , wherein in a third direction orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction, the length of the grip member is longer than the length of a region of the sealing part, the region being interposed between the pair of second grooves. Buermann teaches that it was known in the art to manufacture a grip member (19) with a larger size than a tear portion (Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have changed the size of the grip member, in order to make the grip member easier for a user to grasp. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY R ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7426. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday-Friday. 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. /JEFFREY R ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12766350
CONTAINER AND CLOSURE SYSTEMS WITH FLAME MITIGATION
1y 11m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12759771
LID ASSEMBLY WITH A SLIDER FOR BEVERAGE CONTAINER
2y 8m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12759766
STRAWLESS DRINKING LID FOR A CONTAINER
2y 7m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12758054
FRESHNESS-RETAINING SEALED JAR
1y 3m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12747065
STACKABLE CONTAINER SYSTEM FOR STORING AND REHEATING FOOD SLICE
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 29, 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
48%
Grant Probability
75%
With Interview (+26.8%)
3y 2m (~1y 4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1131 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