Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/209,370

COMPRESSED-AIR-DRIVEN VACUUM GENERATION DEVICE AND AREA SUCTION GRIPPER

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
May 15, 2025
Examiner
ZOLLINGER, NATHAN C
Art Unit
3746
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
J. Schmalz GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
590 granted / 851 resolved
-0.7% vs TC avg
Strong +41% interview lift
Without
With
+41.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
888
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
48.0%
+8.0% vs TC avg
§102
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 851 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 Objections Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 8 recites “in order to prevent a backflow from the nozzle line or a closed nozzle line”. This phrasing seems to repeat a redundant idea as the nozzle line would assumedly already be closed when utilizing a non-return device or non-return valve or non-return flap. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “compressed-air supply” in claim 1, “control apparatus” in claim 4, “non-return device” in claim 8, “silencer apparatus” in claims 9 and 14, “interface apparatus” and “signal connection” in claim 10, “fastening element” in claim 11. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. 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. Claim 1 and its dependents 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. Claim 1 recites “a particular flow connection” while claim 2 recites “the flow connection” and claim 3 recites “the flow connections”. These recitations are not consistent and Examiner cannot be certain of their degree of similarity due to their inherent differences. Examiner requests clarification on the matter and, for purposes of this examination, will assume they are one and the same and singular. Claim 12 also recites that “the nozzle apparatus and/or the silencer apparatus are connected to one another in series” which, were the operator “or” chosen, renders the limitation ambiguous because only one element is connected to one another and there would not be another entity in the alternative format. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Milhau (US 9,334,128). Claim 1: Millhau discloses a compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device for insertion into a housing of an area suction gripper (Figs. 1-2, note col. 1, lines 5-8, Examiner noting the devices shown are capable for insertion or arrangement “in the immediate proximity of gripper members proper as constituted by suction cups or suction boxes”), the compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device comprising a plurality of nozzle lines (note plurality of modules, 33, and that each module will have its own nozzle, 7) each having at least one ejector nozzle (2) for generating a vacuum from compressed air, at least one compressed-air connection (4/14) for connection to a compressed-air supply (col. 3, lines 43-46), and a valve device (5) which is designed to individually open and/or close a particular flow connection between the nozzle lines and the at least one compressed-air connection (Fig. 1). Claim 10: Millhau further discloses that the compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device has an interface apparatus designed as a front cover (note 1a/1b), wherein the compressed-air connection and/or at least one signal connection are arranged on the interface apparatus (see Fig. 1) . Claim(s) 1-9 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blatt (US 5,277,468). Claim 1: Blatt discloses a compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device for insertion into a housing of an area suction gripper (Figs. 1 and 7, note col. 6, lines 20-24), the compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device comprising a plurality of nozzle lines (Fig. 2, note plurality of lines 18a, 18b, etc.) each having at least one ejector nozzle (34a, 34b, etc..) for generating a vacuum from compressed air, at least one compressed-air connection (Fig. 7, note connections between 25 and 22a/22b) for connection to a compressed-air supply (25), and a valve device (5 or 22a/b) which is designed to individually open and/or close a particular flow connection between the nozzle lines and the at least one compressed-air connection (Fig. 1). Claim 2: Blatt further discloses that the valve device (22a/b) is designed and configured to block and open a first nozzle line (Fig. 7, note one of lines around 38a or 38b) with a first closing element (Fig. 7, Examiner noting that the valve device 22a/b will inherently possess a valve closing element), and to block and open a second nozzle line (e.g. another of the lines around 38a) and a third nozzle line (note one of the lines around 36b) together with a second closing element. Claim 3: Blatt further discloses the valve device for opening and blocking the flow connection has at least one control piston (Examiner noting that the solenoid operated valve 22 will possess a solenoid structure which will necessarily possess a coil/piston structure that moves linearly) which is arranged in a control piston apparatus (solenoid), and which is designed and arranged to block the flow of at least one of the nozzle lines and to interrupt or at least weaken the flow connection to the ejector nozzle of the nozzle line (Fig. 7, Examiner noting that the solenoid operated valve will be used to block/interrupt flow to the nozzles). Claim 4: Blatt further discloses that the compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device for opening and blocking the flow connections has a control apparatus which is designed and configured to actuate the valve device (19) pneumatically and/or electrically (see col. 3, lines 49-51). Claim 5: Blatt further discloses a control valve apparatus (Fig. 7, note control valve apparatus inclusive of 22a/60a and/or additional control valve apparatus components such as 22b/58b) is provided which is designed and configured to adjust the control piston, and has at least one electrically and/or pneumatically actuatable control valve (Fig. 7). Claim 6: Blatt further discloses that the compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device has a suction channel (Fig. 7, note suction channel upstream of 76a/b) which in terms of flow connects a channel suction opening (Fig. 7, note opening which will be at the junction of the suction channel and ejector near 76a/b) to at least one of the nozzle lines. Claim 7: Blatt further discloses that the suction channel and the nozzle lines are arranged in a nozzle apparatus (note nozzle housing structure for suction channel and nozzle lines in Figs. 2 and 4-5). Claim 8: Blatt further discloses that at least one non-return device (Fig. 7, note 76a/b) or a non-return valve or a non-return flap, is arranged in the suction channel in order to prevent a backflow from the nozzle line or a closed nozzle line through the channel suction opening. Claim 9: Blatt further discloses that the compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device has a silencer apparatus (90a/90b), wherein the nozzle lines open into the silencer apparatus (Fig. 7). Claim 13: Blatt further discloses a housing (Fig. 7, note housing 10 delineated by dotted line) into which the compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device is at least partially inserted, wherein the housing has a plurality of suction openings (note suction openings that connect with 14a/14b) in one suction side (Fig. 7). Claim 14: Blatt further discloses that the compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device has a silencer apparatus (90a/b), the nozzle lines open into the silencer apparatus (Fig. 7), and the silencer apparatus (90a/b) is arranged completely in an interior space of the housing (Fig. 7, note 90a/b within dotted lines of 10) . Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gieskes (US 7,267,382). Claim 1: Gieskes discloses a compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device for insertion into a housing of an area suction gripper (Figs. 1-8, note col. 1, lines 13-16, Examiner noting the devices shown are capable for insertion or arrangement for “one or more pick and place mechanisms mounted in a pick and place machine”), the compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device comprising a plurality of nozzle lines (Fig. 4, note nozzle lines downstream of 12) each having at least one ejector nozzle (12) for generating a vacuum from compressed air, at least one compressed-air connection (e.g., note connection at 16) for connection to a compressed-air supply (10), and a valve device (18) which is designed to individually open and/or close a particular flow connection between the nozzle lines and the at least one compressed-air connection (Fig. 4). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blatt (US 5,277,468) in view of Blatt (US 4,828,306). Claim 11: Blatt discloses the previous limitations. Blatt further discloses a suction channel (Fig. 7, note suction channel upstream of 76a/b) which in terms of flow connects a channel suction opening to at least one of the nozzle lines (Fig. 7, note opening which will be at the junction of the suction channel and ejector near 76a/b), the suction channel and the nozzle lines are arranged in a nozzle apparatus (Figs. 2 and 4-5, note apparatus/housing apparatus for nozzles), the compressed-air-driven vacuum generation device has a silencer apparatus (Fig. 7, note 90a/b), the nozzle lines open into the silencer apparatus, the nozzle apparatus (Figs. 2 and 4-5), and/or the silencer apparatus are each designed as a module with its own module housing. Blatt ‘468 is not explicit about each the nozzle apparatus and silencer apparatus each having at least one fastening element or a plug-in connector for mutually fastening the two apparatuses to one another. However, Blatt ‘306 (see Fig. 2) teaches a nozzle apparatus (16) and a silencer apparatus (40) each having a plug-in connector (Fig. 2, note interlocking receptacle/protrusion between these entities) for mutually fastening the two apparatuses to one another. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to a skilled artisan to utilize a silencer as taught by Blatt ‘306 into the apparatus of Blatt ‘468 as a silencer is well known to reduce noise/vibrations. Claim 12: Blatt ‘468 and Blatt ‘306 teach the previous limitations. Blatt ‘306 further teaches that the nozzle apparatus and/or the silencer apparatus are connected to one another in series (see Blatt ‘306, Fig. 2. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN C ZOLLINGER whose telephone number is (571)270-7815. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-F 9-4 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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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. /NATHAN C ZOLLINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 15, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601341
DIAPHRAGM PUMP ADJUSTMENT PORTION FOR ADJUSTING RESONANT FREQUENCY OF DIAPHRAGM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601342
FLUID-ACTUATED MICROFLUIDIC MEMBRANE PUMP WITH DIFFERENTLY-SIZED INLET AND OUTLET PORTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601334
VARIABLE DISPLACEMENT HYDRAULIC PUMP SYSTEM WITH OVER-TEMPERATURE PREVENTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12584495
Keyless Nesting Diffuser for Centrifugal Pumps
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571385
HIGH-PRESSURE PLUNGER PUMP, AND USE OF A HIGH-PRESSURE PLUNGER PUMP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+41.1%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 851 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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