Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 17/569,380

LASER APPARATUS, LASER PROCESSING SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING ELECTRONIC DEVICE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 05, 2022
Priority
Aug 30, 2019 — continuation of PCTJP2019034236
Examiner
WARD, THOMAS JOHN
Art Unit
3761
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Gigaphoton Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
77%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allowance Rate
341 granted / 659 resolved
-18.3% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 1m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
695
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
64.5%
+24.5% vs TC avg
§102
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
§112
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 659 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 Status Claims 1,13 and 20 have been amended. Claim 12 has been cancelled. Claim 21 has been newly added. Claims 1-11 and 13-21 are pending and examined as follows: 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 6 is 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 6 recites the limitation "the absorption line" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 has been amended to include the limitation “optical absorption lines of oxygen” and claim 6 is dependent from claim 1. The limitation in claim 6 should read “one of the optical absorption lines of oxygen”. Allowable Subject Matter The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claims 1-5,7-11 and 13-21 are allowable because the prior art does not disclose or teach the plurality of wavelengths of the wavelength-converted beams being a plurality of wavelengths included in wavelengths at which the ArF excimer laser amplifier performs amplification and being wavelengths different from optical absorption lines of oxygen. Claim 6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 THOMAS JOHN WARD whose telephone number is (571)270-1786. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7am - 4pm. 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, EDWARD LANDRUM can be reached at 5712725567. 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. /THOMAS J WARD/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /JOHN J NORTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 05, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Apr 28, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 20, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12723814
METHOD FOR PROVIDING A ROTATING SHAFT INTO A HIGH PRESSURE, HIGH TEMPERATURE FURNACE
1y 11m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12723815
METHOD FOR PROVIDING A ROTATING SHAFT INTO A HIGH PRESSURE, HIGH TEMPERATURE FURNACE
1y 0m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12686069
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SETTING UP WELDING PARAMETERS
10y 1m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12677355
Induction Heating Unit Adjustment Device and Adjusting Method for an Adjustment of at Least One Field Former Element of an Induction Heating Unit
4y 10m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12667220
DEVICE FOR HEATING FILLED BRIOCHES
3y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 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
52%
Grant Probability
77%
With Interview (+25.3%)
4y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 659 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