Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 19/225,191

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PRODUCING STERILE SOLUTION FILLED CONTAINERS

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jun 02, 2025
Priority
Dec 28, 2020 — provisional 63/130,979 +3 more
Examiner
WEEKS, GLORIA R
Art Unit
3731
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
BAXTER INTERNATIONAL INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
Est. Remaining
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allowance Rate
566 granted / 807 resolved
At TC average
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
840
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
47.9%
+7.9% vs TC avg
§102
36.9%
-3.1% vs TC avg
§112
12.1%
-27.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 807 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . This action is in response to the documents received on June 2, 2025. 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. 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 1-20 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 the limitation "the one or more at least partially filled product containers" in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be understood to be an introduction of the limitation of - - one or more at least partially filled product containers” as presented in the rejection below. 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. Claims 1-4, 9, 11, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HUSNU et al. (US 9,139,316). PNG media_image1.png 444 740 media_image1.png Greyscale Diagram I In reference to claim 1, HUSNU et al. discloses a method of producing sterile solution filled containers comprising: positioning a cartridge 300 onto a filling machine, the cartridge including a plurality of containers 400, 405, each of the plurality of containers having a stem extending between a volume of the container and a connection line (see Diagram I above); coupling the cartridge to a feed line (see Diagram I above) in fluid communication with a mix tank 1502; purging air (column 24 lines 11-40) from the connection line before at least partially filling the containers 400, 405; pumping (column 24 lines 41-46) fluid 110 through the feed line and the connection line, the connection line in fluid communication a reservoir coupled to the connection line (see Diagram I above); sealing (column 24 lines 41-47) the stem of each of the at least partially filled containers at a location 320 between the connection line and the volume of the at least partially filled containers; and separating each of the at least partially filled and sealed containers from the connection line. PNG media_image2.png 492 840 media_image2.png Greyscale Diagram II HUSNU et al. does not explicitly disclose including a filter assembly in the process referenced in figure 41. Figure 1 of HUSNU et al. discloses a process of operating an alternative sterile solution filling system wherein a filter assembly is in fluid communication with a feed line and connection line (see Diagram II above). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have modified the process of HUSNU et al. figure 41 to include positioning a filter assembly in fluid communication with a feed line and connection line since column 9 lines 55-67 of HUSNU et al. suggests such a modification would ensure that the product filled into the containers is properly sterilized according to government regulation thereby ensuring the integrity of the product filled into the containers. Regarding claim 2, figures 40-42 of HUSNU et al. disclose the mix tank upstream in the fluid communication with the reservoir, such that the reservoir is at least partially filled with product prior to at least partially filling the plurality of containers. With respect to claim 3, the method of HUSNU et al. in figures 40-42 discloses activating a pump to at least partially fill the plurality of containers, but does not disclose the reservoir disposed between the pump and the filter assembly as modified in claim 1. Figure 2 of HUSNU et al. teaches a process of at least partially filling containers wherein a reservoir 260 is provided between a pump 200 and a filter assembly 270 . It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have further modified the purging process of HUSNU et al. to include a secondary reservoir between the pump and the filter assembly since column 8 lines 7-12 of HUSNU et al. suggests that such a modification provides means for diluting product that is fed to the containers. In reference to claim 4, figures 40-42 of HUSNU et al. discloses the step of arranging at at least a portion of the plurality of containers in a first row when implementing the filling steps of claim 1. Regarding claim 9, column lines of HUSNU et al. disclose puring air from the connection line by activating a pump 200 to deliver gas from the connection line to a reservoir 100 disposed above the connection line (see Diagram I above). With respect to claims 11 and 17, figures 14-17 of HUSNU et al. discloses the step of coupling the plurality of containers to a cartridge that facilitate removal and attachment of the plurality of containers (vials) on the cartridge to a filling machine as shown in figure 33; wherein the cartridge includes position a plurality of containers that can be . In reference to claim 19, figure 1 of HUSNU et al. discloses pumping fluid through two filters 270, 630 in series, such that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have further modified the purging process of figures 40-42 to include the provision of two filters in series since column 12 lines 26-31 of HUSNU et al. state such a modification would prevent any backflow of contaminants into the at least partially filled containers. Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HUSNU et al. (US 9,139,316) in view of KIRCHER et al. (US 2021/0309398). Regarding claims 12-15, HUSNU et al. discloses the step of sealing the plurality of containers at a stem secured thereto, but does not disclose analyzing the seal of the plurality of containers as claimed. Figure 4 of KIRCHER et al. teaches a process of filling a plurality of containers 58 with product in sterilized condition comprising: capturing a stem of a container with a sealing device 138; analyzing data from a sensor associated with the seal of the stem 185 with a processor 28; identifying (paragraph [0221]) a status of the seal condition based on the sensor data and accepting/rejecting (indicator) the seal based on the analyzed data in comparison to stored (threshold) acceptable parameters of the seal. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have modified sealing step of HUSNU et al. to include the analyzing and identifying steps as it pertains to the seal for the purpose of ensuring a satisfactory seal of the containers as suggested by paragraph [0221] of KIRCHER. Claims 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HUSNU et al. (US 9,139,316) in view of MAGGIORE (US 2019/0048303). With respect to claim 16 and 18, HUSNU et al. discloses a method of at least partially filling containers in the form of vials in a sterilized manner with a bioactive product; not bags nor bladders. MAGGIORE teaches a method of at least partially filling containers in a sterilized manner with a bioactive product, wherein claim 20 teaches the equivalence of vials and bags in the art of packaging bioactive product. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have modified the process of HUSNU et al. to include either vials or bags/bladders as the plurality of containers since claim 20 and figure 3 of MAGGIORE suggests the selection of either container would be equally sufficient to maintain a bioactive product in a sterilized packaged manner. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-8, 10 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to the attached PTO-892 for a notice of references cited and recommended for consideration based on their disclosure of limitations related to method of producing sterile solution filled containers. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLORIA R WEEKS whose telephone number is (571)272-4473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-2pm & 5pm-7pm 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, Shelley Self can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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. Other helpful telephone numbers are listed for applicant's benefit: Allowed Files & Publication (888) 786-0101 Assignment Branch (800) 972-6382 Certificates of Correction (703) 305-8309 Fee Questions (571) 272-6400 Inventor Assistance Center (800) PTO-9199 Petitions/special Programs (571) 272-3282 Information Help line 1-800-786-9199 /GLORIA R WEEKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731 April 9, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 02, 2025
Application Filed
Apr 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12611343
ABSORBENT ARTICLE PACKAGES WITH NATURAL FIBERS
2y 2m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12605808
POWER TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12599378
HANDHELD ELECTROMECHANICAL SURGICAL SYSTEM
1y 9m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599382
STAPLE CARTRIDGE COMPRISING FORMATION SUPPORT FEATURES
1y 2m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600506
PHARMACY PACKAGING SYSTEM
1y 2m to grant Granted Apr 14, 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
70%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+12.2%)
3y 4m (~2y 5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 807 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