Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 15, 2026
Application No. 19/168,970

SYSTEMS, APPARATUSES, AND METHODS FOR DELIVERING EXPLOSIVE COMPOSITIONS INTO BOREHOLES

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Sep 25, 2025
Priority
Mar 26, 2023 — provisional 63/492,238 +1 more
Examiner
BERGIN, JAMES S
Art Unit
3641
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Orica International Pte. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 6m
Est. Remaining
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
798 granted / 1006 resolved
+27.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
1038
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
§103
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
§102
19.6%
-20.4% vs TC avg
§112
36.1%
-3.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1006 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 104-123 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. In particular, the description does not explain how selectively varying the fill rate of the explosive composition into the borehole can lead to the result of selectively varied sizes and locations of cavities inside the borehole. 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 104-123 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. In independent claim 104, lines 7 and 9, it is unclear whether the term, “two or more cavities”, could reasonably be interpreted to be voids present in the explosive composition produced by gassing of the explosive composition at the nozzle of the explosive delivery conduit? In independent claim 114, lines 7 and 9, it is unclear whether the term, “two or more cavities”, could reasonably be interpreted to be voids present in the explosive composition produced by gassing at the nozzle of the explosive delivery conduit? In claim 111, line 2, the meaning of the term, “RBS values”, is unclear. Does it mean “relative bulk strength”, or something else? In claim 121, line 2, the meaning of the term, “RBS values”, is unclear. Does it mean “relative bulk strength”, or something else? Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. see the attached PTO-FORM 892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES S BERGIN whose telephone number is (571)272-6872. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5am. 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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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 S BERGIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12687379
BLAST DETERMINATION SYSTEM
1y 7m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12680797
PROJECTILES, REACTIVE COMPOSITIONS FOR PROJECTILES AND ARTICLES CONTAINING THE REACTIVE COMPOSITION
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12674386
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DETERMINING WATER DEPTH AND EXPLOSIVE DEPTH IN BLASTHOLES
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12656090
PROPELLANT CHARGE AND CANNON SHELL THEREWITH
2y 8m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12644680
SHAPED CHARGE ASSEMBLY
1y 5m to grant Granted Jun 02, 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
79%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+10.1%)
2y 4m (~1y 6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1006 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