Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/633,278

Method for displaying an OCT-scanned region of a workpiece surface and/or for measuring surface features, and associated OCT system

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 07, 2022
Examiner
HUA, QUAN M
Art Unit
2645
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Trumpf Laser GmbH
OA Round
6 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
6-7
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
445 granted / 621 resolved
+9.7% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
666
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
§103
48.3%
+8.3% vs TC avg
§102
18.4%
-21.6% vs TC avg
§112
17.0%
-23.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 621 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Claims 15, 17-22, 24-26, 28-30 are presented. Amendments in the RCE of record is/are entered. IDS dated 1/23/2026 is considered. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are moot in view of a new ground of rejection. A new reference, Tsikos et al. (US 2003/0019933) , is incorporated to address the amendments introduced in the RCE. See the discussions below for details. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 15, 17-22, 24-26, 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung et al. (US 2015/0043003) in of Tsikos et al. (US 2003/0019933). As to claim 15: Chung discloses method for displaying an optically scanned region of an object sample surface, the method comprising: recording an image of the sample surface; (See ¶0057, acquiring a first image (visible image) using a visible camera of the sample. 0060, display the first image) recording a height profile of the sample surface in the image excerpt by optically scanning the workpiece surface using an optical coherence tomograph; generating a heigh profile using data recorded by optical scanning of the sample in the image (¶0059, 0066-0069, 0078, 0092, using the OCT system to optically scanning, i.e. recording, the sample to generate a tomographic output, i.e. height profile, used by user to examine the surface) and displaying the recorded image and the recorded height profile of the workpiece surface jointly. (See Chung, ¶0098, displaying the first and second images (visible image and OCT image) in particular, Fig. 8a-c,the displaying of the first and second images are generated jointly) Chung does not disclose “limiting a region of the workpiece surface to be subsequently scanned by an optical coherence tomograph by selecting an image excerpt within the image of the workpiece surface, wherein the region of the workpiece surface which is to be subsequently scanned by the optical coherence tomograph is restricted to said image excerpt. ” and Chung is open-ended on whether the scanning to generate height profile is restricted to only the selected image excerpt region of the surface of the object being the workpiece. Tsikos, in a related field of advanced optical image analysis to analyze images of objects under operation (i.e. workpiece), discloses limiting a region of the workpiece surface to be subsequently scanned by an optical coherence tomograph by selecting an image excerpt within the image of the workpiece surface, wherein the region of the workpiece surface which is to be subsequently scanned by the optical system is restricted to said image excerpt. (See at least ¶01369, 1372, 1753, wherein the optical system identifies region of interests (ROIs) to be processed by the system, thereby limiting a region to be scan to these ROIs, by selecting pixels group that is identified as ROI pixels for subsequent processing. Tsikos further discloses, according ¶0262, 1369, 1372, 1760, 1322, the instant system is configured to select certain region(s) of particular interest pertaining to the object under operation, and the scanning covers within only the selected regions of interest for recording and generating heigh profile of the object of interest. For example, Tsikos discloses “control computer 22 determines the corresponding pixel indices (ij) which specifies the portion of the image frame (i.e. a slice of the region of interest), to be effectively cropped from the image to be subsequently captured by the auto-focus/auto-zoom digital camera subsystem” (….), and “these control commands are used by the image processing computer 21 to crop pixels in the ROI of captured images, transferred to image processing computer 21 for image-based bar code symbol decoding and/or OCR-based image processing. This ROI cropping function serves to selectively identify for image processing only those image pixels “ (…), and “these ROI coordinates can be converted into the camera's coordinate reference system and then used to crop only those pixels residing within the ROI of captured linear images”, and “only regions of interest reflecting the package or package label require image processing by the image processing computer” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the tomography system/method of Chung to incorporate the practice of selective planning of ROIs and scanning that are limited to only the selected regions of interest of the object under operation. Such practice of selective scanning advantageously is common to all optical systems, regardless of specific technology, because improve speed of scanning and reconstruction of objects in tomography scans and reducing exposure time of objects to any radiation thus saving energy/processing time (Tsikos, ¶0176, “substantially reduced the computational burden”) As to Claim 17: Chung in view of Tsikos discloses all limitations of claim 15, which further comprises selecting the image excerpt graphically directly on the displayed image. (analysis region is a sub area of the display image, See Chung, ¶0027, 0105) As to Claim 18: Chung in view of Tsikos discloses all limitations of claim 17, which further comprises using at least one of a mouse, a pinch-zoom function or a position input to select the image excerpt graphically directly on the displayed image. (Chung, ¶0027, 0062 position-based user input unit to select position of region to be examined on the display) As to Claim 19: Chung in view of Tsikos discloses all limitations of claim 15, which further comprises recording the image coaxially relative to a measuring arm of the optical coherence tomograph. (Fig. 1 of Chung, the image of object and the beam of radiator are coaxially relative to each other) As to claim 20: Chung discloses a method for measuring surface features of an object sample surface (See Abstract, ¶0067, 0068), the method comprising: recording an image of the sample surface; (See ¶0057, acquiring a first image (visible image) using a visible camera of the sample. 0060, display the first image) determining at least one surface feature to be examined based on the recorded image; (¶0027, 0105, at least a sub region of the image is selected) and recording a height profile of the same surface by optically scanning the workpiece surface using an optical coherence tomograph, to examine the at least one determined surface feature. (¶0059, 0066-0069, 0078, 0092, using the OCT system to optically scanning the sample to obtain a tomographic output, which used by user to examine the surface) Chung does not disclose limiting a region of the workpiece surface to be subsequently scanned by an optical coherence tomograph by selecting an image excerpt within the image of the workpiece surface, wherein the region of the workpiece surface which is to be subsequently scanned by the optical coherence tomograph is restricted to said image excerpt. And Chung is open-ended on whether the scanning to generate height profile is restricted to only the selected image excerpt region of the surface of the object being the workpiece. Tsikos, in a related field of advanced optical image analysis to analyze images of objects under operation (i.e. workpiece), discloses limiting a region of the workpiece surface to be subsequently scanned by an optical coherence tomograph by selecting an image excerpt within the image of the workpiece surface, wherein the region of the workpiece surface which is to be subsequently scanned by the optical system is restricted to said image excerpt. (See at least ¶01369, 1372, 1753, wherein the optical system identifies region of interests (ROIs) to be processed by the system, thereby limiting a region to be scan to these ROIs, by selecting pixels group that is identified as ROI pixels for subsequent processing. Tsikos further discloses, according ¶0262, 1369, 1372, 1760, 1322, the instant system is configured to select certain region(s) of particular interest pertaining to the object under operation, and the scanning covers within only the selected regions of interest for recording and generating heigh profile of the object of interest. For example, Tsikos discloses “control computer 22 determines the corresponding pixel indices (ij) which specifies the portion of the image frame (i.e. a slice of the region of interest), to be effectively cropped from the image to be subsequently captured by the auto-focus/auto-zoom digital camera subsystem” (….), and “these control commands are used by the image processing computer 21 to crop pixels in the ROI of captured images, transferred to image processing computer 21 for image-based bar code symbol decoding and/or OCR-based image processing. This ROI cropping function serves to selectively identify for image processing only those image pixels “ (…), and “these ROI coordinates can be converted into the camera's coordinate reference system and then used to crop only those pixels residing within the ROI of captured linear images”, and “only regions of interest reflecting the package or package label require image processing by the image processing computer”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the tomography system/method of Chung to incorporate the practice of selective planning of ROIs and scanning that are limited to only the selected regions of interest of the object under operation. Such practice of selective scanning advantageously is common to all optical systems, regardless of specific technology, because improve speed of scanning and reconstruction of objects in tomography scans and reducing exposure time of objects to any radiation thus saving energy/processing time (Tsikos, ¶0176, “substantially reduced the computational burden”) As to claim 21: Chung in view of Tsikos discloses all limitations of claim 20, which further comprises automatically determining the at least one surface feature to be measured based on the recorded image. (¶0049, Chung discloses the analysis region is determined dynamically by the system, without any user intervention (automatically), thus improving convenience and accuracy. The analysis region is confined within the image’s boundary with orientation/size being relative to the visible image) As to claim 22: Chung in view of Tsikos discloses all limitations of claim 20, which further comprises the at least one surface feature to be measured is determined manually on the basis of the displayed image. (Chung, (¶0027, 0105, at least a sub region of the image is selected manually) As to claim 24: Chung in view of Tsikos discloses all limitations of claim 22, which further comprises selecting the image excerpt graphically directly on the displayed image. (analysis region is a sub area of the display image, in Chung, ¶0027, 0105) As to claim 25: Chung in view of Tsikos discloses all limitations of claim 24, which further comprises using at least one of a mouse, a pinch-zoom function or a position input to select the image excerpt graphically directly on the displayed image. (Chung, ¶0027, 0062 position-based user input unit to select position of region to be examined on the display) As to Claim 26: Chung discloses an OCT system (See Abstract), comprising: an optical coherence tomograph for recording a height profile of ab object surface by optically scanning the workpiece surface (¶0059, 0066-0069, 0078, 0092, using the OCT system to optically scanning the sample to obtain a tomographic output, which used by user to examine the surface); a camera for recording an image of the object surface(See ¶0057, acquiring a first image (visible image) using a visible camera of the sample. 0060, display the first image: a selection device for selecting an image excerpt within of the displayed image; (¶0027, 0105, selecting a region of the image) ; and recording a height profile of the sample surface in the image excerpt by optically scanning the workpiece surface using an optical coherence tomograph; (¶0059, 0066-0069, 0078, 0092, using the OCT system to optically scanning the sample to obtain a tomographic output, which used by user to examine the surface) a display for jointly displaying the recorded image and the recorded height profile of the workpiece surface in the image excerpt. (See Chung, ¶0098, Fig. 8a-c, displaying the first and second images (visible image and OCT image) jointly or in overlapping manner) Chung does not disclose restricting a region of the workpiece surface to be subsequently scanned by an optical coherence tomograph by selecting an image excerpt within the image of the workpiece surface, wherein the region of the workpiece surface which is to be subsequently scanned by the optical coherence tomograph is restricted to said image excerpt. Chung is open-ended on whether the scanning to generate height profile is restricted to only the selected image excerpt region of the surface of the object being the workpiece. Tsikos, in a related field of advanced optical image analysis to analyze images of objects under operation (i.e. workpiece), discloses limiting a region of the workpiece surface to be subsequently scanned by an optical coherence tomograph by selecting an image excerpt within the image of the workpiece surface, wherein the region of the workpiece surface which is to be subsequently scanned by the optical system is restricted to said image excerpt. (See at least ¶01369, 1372, 1753, wherein the optical system identifies region of interests (ROIs) to be processed by the system, thereby limiting a region to be scan to these ROIs, by selecting pixels group that is identified as ROI pixels for subsequent processing. Tsikos further discloses, according ¶0262, 1369, 1372, 1760, 1322, the instant system is configured to select certain region(s) of particular interest pertaining to the object under operation, and the scanning covers within only the selected regions of interest for recording and generating heigh profile of the object of interest. For example, Tsikos discloses “control computer 22 determines the corresponding pixel indices (ij) which specifies the portion of the image frame (i.e. a slice of the region of interest), to be effectively cropped from the image to be subsequently captured by the auto-focus/auto-zoom digital camera subsystem” (….), and “these control commands are used by the image processing computer 21 to crop pixels in the ROI of captured images, transferred to image processing computer 21 for image-based bar code symbol decoding and/or OCR-based image processing. This ROI cropping function serves to selectively identify for image processing only those image pixels “ (…), and “these ROI coordinates can be converted into the camera's coordinate reference system and then used to crop only those pixels residing within the ROI of captured linear images”, and “only regions of interest reflecting the package or package label require image processing by the image processing computer” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the tomography system/method of Chung to incorporate the practice of selective planning of ROIs and scanning that are limited to only the selected regions of interest of the object under operation. Such practice of selective scanning advantageously is common to all optical systems, regardless of specific technology, because improve speed of scanning and reconstruction of objects in tomography scans and reducing exposure time of objects to any radiation thus saving energy/processing time (Tsikos, ¶0176, “substantially reduced the computational burden”) As to claim 28: Chung in view of Tsikos discloses all limitations of claim 26, wherein said selection device has an input for graphically selecting the image excerpt within or outside of the displayed image. (Chung, ¶0027, 0062 position-based user input unit to select position of region to be examined on the display) As to claim 29: Chung in view of Tsikos discloses all limitations of claim 28, wherein said input of said selection device is a touch-sensitive screen of said display on which the image excerpt is selected, or an input panel for manual position input. (Chung, ¶0027, 0062 position-based user input unit for example a touch pad to select position of region to be examined on the display) As to claim 30: Chung in view of Tsikos discloses all limitations of claim 26, wherein said camera is coaxially directed at the workpiece surface relative to a measuring arm of said optical coherence tomograph. (Chung, Fig. 1, the image of object and the beam of radiator are coaxially relative to each other.) Conclusion Reference(s) considered relevant to the invention include: CN 1751250 – a first stage screening system (18) detected suspicious region " in a luggage, the luggage transfer to the next level of system (2) where the re-scanning the luggage. According to the invention, a method is provided for discovering and tracking suspicious areas in the luggage device/method, the apparatus/method can drastically reduce the area to be re-scanning. Therefore, the part of the suspicious region from the first stage system in the image together with the image transferred to the second system from the first system. Once the luggage reaches the second stage (21), for measurement of simple X-ray transmission image using additional source/detector system (6). Then, strictly aligning the two images to determine the suspicious region in a second stage scanner system. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUAN M HUA whose telephone number is (571)270-7232. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-6:30. 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, Anthony Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. 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. /QUAN M HUA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 07, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 14, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 30, 2024
Response Filed
Nov 27, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 02, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 02, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
May 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 07, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Aug 28, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 23, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 08, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602921
TECHNIQUES FOR MODIFYING AND TRAINING A NEURAL NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12574761
MULTI-AP ASSOCIATION IDENTIFIERS MANAGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12572803
MULTI-AGENT REINFORCEMENT LEARNING WITH MATCHMAKING POLICIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559330
LOADING OPERATION MONITORING APPARATUS AND METHOD OF USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556939
FIRST NODE, THIRD NODE, FOURTH NODE AND METHODS PERFORMED THEREBY, FOR HANDLING PARAMETERS TO CONFIGURE A NODE IN A COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+21.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 621 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