Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/057,902

SEPARATOR, PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF, AND SECONDARY BATTERY AND ELECTRIC APPARATUS RELATED THERETO

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Feb 19, 2025
Priority
Dec 05, 2022 — continuation of PCTCN2022136428
Examiner
WEINER, LAURA S
Art Unit
1723
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., Limited
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 8m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
984 granted / 1155 resolved
+20.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
1189
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
50.8%
+10.8% vs TC avg
§102
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
§112
18.0%
-22.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1155 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5-29-2026 has been entered. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 10-12, 14-15 and 18-19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, 7. 9-11, 13-17 and 19-20 of copending Application No. 19/050,392 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Application No. 19/050,392 claims in claims 1, 4 and 15, a separator comprising a substrate and a coating provided with a thickness on at least one side of the substrate with a coating comprises granular organic materials comprising organic silicone particles having the same Dv90 as instant claim 1, the same Dv50 and Dv90-Dv10/Dv50 as instant claims 3-4. Application No. 19/050,392 claims in claim 9, the exact same organosilicon particle comprising a 1st, 2nd and 3rd polymer of claim 1.Application No. 19/050,392 claims in claim 7, the exact same instant claim 12. Application No. 19/050,392 claims in claim 10 the same claim is instant claim 7. Application No. 19/050,392 claims in claim 11 the exact same instant claim 8. Application No. 19/050,392 claims in claim 13, the exact same instant claim 10.Application No. 19/050,392 claims in claim 14, the exact same instant claims 11.Application No. 19/050,392 claims in claim 16, the exact same instant claims 5 and 14. Application No. 19/050,392 claims in claim 17 the exact same instant claim 15. Application No. 19/050,392 claims in claims 19-20, the exact same instant claims 18-19. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Laura Weiner whose telephone number is (571)272-1294. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am-5 pm EST M-F. 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, Tong Guo can be reached at 571-272-3066. 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. /LAURA S. WEINER/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 1723 /Laura Weiner/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 2 earlier events
Jan 05, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §DP
Apr 20, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 20, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
May 29, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12683186
ALL-SOLID-STATE SECONDARY BATTERY
4y 2m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12683166
Composite Particle Including Electrode Material and Electrode for Electrochemical Device Including the Same
1y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12665192
INTERMETALLIC ANODE MATERIALS FOR LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES
3y 8m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12658423
RECHARGEABLE ZINC METAL BATTERY
3y 11m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12651771
ELECTROLYTIC SOLUTION FOR LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERIES AND LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY INCLUDING THE SAME
3y 7m to grant Granted Jun 09, 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
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+14.3%)
3y 1m (~1y 8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1155 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