Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/097,376

Fracturing Devices

Final Rejection §102§DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Apr 01, 2025
Priority
Sep 20, 2019 — continuation of PCTCN2019107026 +9 more
Examiner
SAYRE, JAMES G
Art Unit
3679
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Yantai Jereh Oilfield Services Group Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
1133 granted / 1349 resolved
+32.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
1367
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
69.8%
+29.8% vs TC avg
§102
7.8%
-32.2% vs TC avg
§112
7.0%
-33.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1349 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DOUBLEPATENT
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 . The response of 10 April 2026 is acknowledged and has been entered. Currently, claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2017/0234308 (Buckley) and 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2021/0095648 (Buckley et al.). Claims 1-12 are additionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,264,568. With the response, claim 1 has been amended. In view thereof, the rejections of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) are withdrawn. With respect to the rejection of claims 1-12 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting; claims 1-12 continue to be rendered obvious by claims 1-12 of the reference patent. In view thereof, this rejection will be maintained and made final. 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 1-12 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim1-12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,264,568. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the reference patent, drawn to the same subject matter, obviously encompass the limitations of the pending claims. 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 JAMES G. SAYRE whose telephone number is (571)270-7045. The examiner can normally be reached from 9:30-6:00 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, Nicole Coy can be reached at 571-272-5405. 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. JAMES G. SAYRE Primary Examiner Art Unit 3672 /JAMES G SAYRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 01, 2025
Application Filed
Jan 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §DOUBLEPATENT
Apr 10, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 23, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12680437
MULTI-WELL BLENDING SYSTEM
1y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12669042
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING MISCIBLE DISPLACEMENT IN A HYDRAULICALLY-STIMULATED RESERVOIR
1y 3m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12655714
MELTABLE MATERIAL TO SEAL FLOW-BY PASSAGEWAYS
1y 3m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12650052
REGULATOR HAVING CHECK VALVE MANIFOLD FOR USE IN SUBSEA CONTROL CIRCUIT
1y 6m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12650051
SUBSEA COMPLETION SYSTEMS
1y 3m 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
84%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+12.8%)
2y 2m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1349 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