Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 19/247,691

FRESHNESS-RETAINING SEALED JAR

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jun 24, 2025
Examiner
ALLEN, JEFFREY R
Art Unit
3733
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
73%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
512 granted / 1086 resolved
-22.9% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
72 currently pending
Career history
1158
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.2%
+9.2% vs TC avg
§102
23.2%
-16.8% vs TC avg
§112
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1086 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 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 1-3 and 6-8 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. Claims 1 and 6 recite “wherein the concave top plate totally seals the opening”. It is unclear if the top plate is the only feature that forms the seal or if totally refers to the amount of sealing that takes place. Furthermore, it is unclear what amount “totally” encompasses. The original disclosure does not describe a total seal and therefore the scope of the claims is unclear. 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. Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feeley et al. (US-20150359365-A1) in view of Vigoureux (US-10220984-B1). Regarding claim 1, Feeley discloses a freshness-retaining sealed jar, comprising a glass jar (12, par. 0034) with an opening (Fig. 7) at a top (19) thereof, a silicone lid (16, par. 0040) detachably arranged at a top of the glass jar; a bottom silicone cover (23, par. 0047) detachably arranged at a bottom of the glass jar; a silicone rubber band (Fig. 11, projection at 11) is arranged at a periphery of the silicone lid and is configured to bind the silicone lid to a top opening of the glass jar (par. 0034); the silicone lid includes a concave top plate (at 10) and a curtain-like enclosure (11) that are integrally formed; the curtain-like enclosure is arranged at a bottom edge of the concave top plate and is wrapped around an outer side of the glass jar (Fig. 13), wherein the concave top plate totally seals the opening of the glass jar, thereby forming the freshness-retaining sealed jar (par. 0034, the seal is airtight so it totally seals), wherein the bottom silicone cover (see U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906 B2 incorporated into Feeley by reference) comprises a bottom plate and a ferrule (U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906, at 309) that are integrally formed; the ferrule is arranged at a top edge of the bottom plate and abuts against an outer side wall of the glass jar (U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906, Fig. 3A), wherein a through hole (U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906, 307) is provided in a center of a bottom of the bottom plate (U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906, Fig. 3A); and a plurality of antislip protrusions (U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906 303A) located on an outer side of the through hole are arranged in a circumference of the bottom of the bottom plate. Feeley fails to teach wherein a side top wall of the glass jar is arranged between an inner side wall of the concave top plate and an inner side wall of the curtain-like enclosure. Vigoureux teaches that it is known in the art to manufacture a lid wherein a side top wall (222) of a jar (220) is arranged between an inner side wall of a concave top plate and an inner side wall of a curtain-like enclosure (Fig. 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have manufactured the assembly with the concave shape taught by Vigoureux, so that material could be collected in the top and since such a modification would be a simple substitution of known chapes on lids. Regarding claim 2, the modified assembly of Feeley teaches wherein limiting protrusions (Feeley, 7) located on two sides of the silicone rubber band are arranged on an upper wall of an outer side of the curtain-like enclosure (Fig. 13). Regarding claim 3, the modified assembly of Feeley teaches wherein the curtain-like enclosure is in a shape of a horn cover (Feeley, Fig. 13), but fails to teach wherein and the glass jar is in a shape with a large top opening and a small bottom. Vigoureux teaches that containers can be made with large top openings and small bottoms (Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have manufactured the jar with the claimed shape, so that jars could be nested and since such a modification would have been a change in shape of an existing component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding claim 6, Feeley discloses a freshness-retaining sealed jar for pickling vegetables (intended use), comprising a glass jar (12, par. 0034) with an opening (Fig. 7) at a top (19) thereof, a silicone lid (16, par. 0040) detachably arranged at a top of the glass jar; a bottom silicone cover (23, par. 0047) detachably arranged at a bottom of the glass jar; a silicone rubber band (Fig. 11, projection at 11) is arranged at a periphery of the silicone lid and is configured to bind the silicone lid to a top opening of the glass jar (par. 0034); the silicone lid includes a concave top plate (at 10) and a curtain-like enclosure (11) that are integrally formed; the curtain-like enclosure is arranged at a bottom edge of the concave top plate and is wrapped around an outer side of the glass jar (Fig. 13), wherein the concave top plate totally seals the opening of the glass jar (par. 0034), wherein the concave top plate is deformable by propping up by gas generated in the glass jar during pickling (based on the material of the top plate), wherein the bottom silicone cover (see U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906 B2 incorporated into Feeley by reference) comprises a bottom plate and a ferrule (U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906, at 309) that are integrally formed; the ferrule is arranged at a top edge of the bottom plate and abuts against an outer side wall of the glass jar (U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906, Fig. 3A), wherein a through hole (U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906, 307) is provided in a center of a bottom of the bottom plate (U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906, Fig. 3A); and a plurality of antislip protrusions (U.S. Pat. No. 8,978,906 303A) located on an outer side of the through hole are arranged in a circumference of the bottom of the bottom plate. Feeley fails to teach wherein a side top wall of the glass jar is arranged between an inner side wall of the concave top plate and an inner side wall of the curtain-like enclosure. Vigoureux teaches that it is known in the art to manufacture a lid wherein a side top wall (222) of a jar (220) is arranged between an inner side wall of a concave top plate and an inner side wall of a curtain-like enclosure (Fig. 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have manufactured the assembly with the concave shape taught by Vigoureux, so that material could be collected in the top and since such a modification would be a simple substitution of known chapes on lids. Regarding claim 7, the modified assembly of Feeley teaches wherein limiting protrusions (Feeley, 7) located on two sides of the silicone rubber band are arranged on an upper wall of an outer side of the curtain-like enclosure (Fig. 13). Regarding claim 8, the modified assembly of Feeley teaches wherein the curtain-like enclosure is in a shape of a horn cover (Feeley, Fig. 13), but fails to teach wherein and the glass jar is in a shape with a large top opening and a small bottom. Vigoureux teaches that containers can be made with large top openings and small bottoms (Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have manufactured the jar with the claimed shape, so that jars could be nested and since such a modification would have been a change in shape of an existing component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding applicant’s argument that Feeley fails to teach lid totally sealing the glass jar, it is noted that Feeley explicitly teaches that the lid provides an air tight seal on the glass jar (par. 0034). One of ordinary skill in the art would understand this air tight seal to be a total seal. Applicant’s disclosure does not provide any special meaning for a total seal and therefore the prior art reads on the limitations as currently claimed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY R ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7426. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, 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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at (571)270-5055. 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. /JEFFREY R ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 24, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Sep 20, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 19, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 18, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600533
STORAGE BOX WITH DOOR LOCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595956
REFRIGERATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12565359
SEALING LID
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12515855
DEVICE FOR ORGANIZING ACCESS TO AT LEAST ONE COMPARTMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12509240
MULTI-DIRECTIONAL BAFFLES FOR AIRCRAFT FUEL TANKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
73%
With Interview (+26.2%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1086 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month