Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/578,973

TEMPERATURE CONTROL METHOD, TEMPERATURE CONTROL DEVICE, AND OPTICAL HEATING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jan 19, 2022
Examiner
ISKRA, JOSEPH W
Art Unit
3761
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
USHIO DENKI KABUSHIKI KAISHA
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
514 granted / 722 resolved
+1.2% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
777
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
58.8%
+18.8% vs TC avg
§102
9.3%
-30.7% vs TC avg
§112
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 722 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 12/09/25. As directed by the amendment: claims 3, 5, and 7 have been amended; claims 2 and 6 have been cancelled; and no claims have been added. Thus, claims 1, 3-5, and 7-9 are presently pending in this application. 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, 3-5, and 7-9 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. With regard to claim 1, the claim recites “based on a change in the temperature of the substrate to be treated measured in the step (B) over time”, the limitation “over time” is unclear with regard to what time is being claimed, and neither the claim nor the written description provides a clear standard for ascertaining the requisite degree of the claimed “over time”, and it is submitted that one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Appropriate correction is required. With regard to claim 5, “based on a change in the temperature of the substrate to be treated measured with the thermometer over time” , the limitation “over time” is unclear with regard to what time is being claimed, and neither the claim nor the written description provides a clear standard for ascertaining the requisite degree of the claimed “over time”, and it is submitted that one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Appropriate correction is required. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/09/25 have been fully considered and are addressed hereafter. The rejection(s) have been adapted as appropriate in view of the newly presented claim amendment(s). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 3-5, and 7-9 would be allowed assuming the above rejection(s) were overcome. The prior art of record by itself or in combination does not disclose the structural and functional limitations as recited in the claims. Specifically, the prior art does not disclose a temperature control method of controlling a temperature of a substrate to be treated with heat using light emitted from a light source part including a plurality of solid-state light sources including the steps of a step (A) of repeated switching between a light-on and light-off state, a step (B) of measuring the temperature of the substrate by observing infrared light radiated from the substrate while the light source part is in a light-off state in step (A), a step (C) of controlling the level of electricity supplied to the light source part in the next round of the light-on state by a proportional control and an integral control, in which the proportional control is based on a difference between the temperature of the substrate in the step (B) and the target temperature, and the integral control is based on a change in the temperature of the substrate measured in the step (B) over time as recited in Claim 1. Claim 5 is directed to a temperature control device for controlling a temperature of a substrate to be treated with heat and includes the same limitations to those of claim 1 which is directed to a method, whereas claim 5 is directed toward a device. Accordingly, the comments presented over claim 1 are equally applicable to claim 5. The closest prior art references of record are Kubo (JP 2006066452) and Gouda (US 20200013645). While Kubo does disclose a rapid heat treatment apparatus and method which includes performing a PID control of lamp power during the “continuous irradiation mode” (S7), a period when the lamp intensity is continuously on. In PID control, the substrate temperature is measured in comparison with the target temperature, this substrate temperature is the measured temperature during the period when the continuous irradiation mod is performed. Further, Kubo at para. [0026]-[0027] that intermittent irradiation mode, lamp power control is not performed using only PID control, and even the output signal from the temperature sensor is not used for this purpose. Accordingly, Kubo does not disclose the claimed proportional control and integral control as claimed in the independent claims of the instant patent application. While Gouda does teach an LED lamp for heating and wafer heating device including the same, Gouda does not remedy the aforementioned deficiencies of the primary prior art citation. Since none of the prior art references of record alone or in combination disclose all the limitations of the applicant's independent claims, and since the prior art of record does not teach and render obvious of having the aforementioned limitations, thus the independent claims read over the prior art of record and are considered to have allowable subject matter. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH W ISKRA whose telephone number is (313) 446-4866. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 09:00-17:00 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, IBRAHIME ABRAHAM can be reached on 571-270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JOSEPH W ISKRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 19, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jun 02, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Nov 10, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 09, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598676
COOKING ARTICLE DETECTION SYSTEM WITH DIFFERENTIAL DETECTION COILS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589632
Vehicle Condenser
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583051
COST EFFECTIVE CARTRIDGE FOR A PLASMA ARC TORCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576466
METHOD FOR TRANSPORTING WORKPIECE PARTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569927
SPOT WELDING ASSEMBLY WITH PIVOTABLE ELECTRODES
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+27.3%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 722 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