Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/670,149

Phase Managed Additive Printing System

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 11, 2022
Examiner
CHEN, SIMPSON ABRAHAM
Art Unit
3761
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Seurat Technologies Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
110 granted / 175 resolved
-7.1% vs TC avg
Strong +47% interview lift
Without
With
+46.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
216
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
52.2%
+12.2% vs TC avg
§102
16.3%
-23.7% vs TC avg
§112
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 175 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 1-18 and 20-38 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/22/2025. 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) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shkolnik (US 2010/015356 A1) in view of DeMuth (US 20180326663 A1) and Hunze (US 20200023467 A1). Claims 19. Shkolnik discloses an additive manufacturing system (100, Fig. 1) that at least two high power lasers to generate beams (142 and 144, Fig. 1A), with at least some beams being partially mixed (laser beams irradiate an overlapping area simultaneously, Fig. 7A, par. 247, where the broadest reasonable interpretation of “partially mixed beams” include when the patterns generated overlap, par. 254); wherein mixing of at least one phase patterned beam with another beam occurs at a print bed (laser beams irradiate an overlapping area simultaneously, Fig. 7A, par. 247) and DeMuth discloses an additive manufacturing device wherein the energy patterning unit is dynamic and eases image pattern where at least some unmixed beams are recycled to provide further beam patterning (par. 41 and 49). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shklolnik to incorporate the teachings of DeMuth and replace Shklolnik’s patterning optics with DeMuth’s energy patterning unit which recycles unused energy. Doing so would have the benefit of reducing energy cost to the system (par. 74, DeMuth) and improve the flexibility and ease of image patterning (par. 41, DeMuth). Shklolnik in view of DeMuth does not explicitly disclose receiving and altering the phase a beam. Hunze discloses an additive manufacturing device wherein the laser’s phase is controlled in order to control the intensity distribution of the irradiation pattern (par. 12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shklolnik in view of DeMuth to incorporate the teachings of Hunze and control the laser’s phase with phase modulators. Doing so would have the benefit of controlling the intensity distribution of the irradiation pattern (par. 12, Hunze). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIMPSON A CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6422. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5. 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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571) 270-5095. 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. /SIMPSON A CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /ELIZABETH M KERR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 11, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589436
DEVICE AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12570127
TEMPERATURE COMPENSATED, FIBER REINFORCED, STRUCTURAL COMPOSITE ROOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564899
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR IRRADIATING A MATERIAL WITH AN ENERGY BEAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558742
METHODS FOR DETECTING A WORKING AREA OF A GENERATIVE MANUFACTURING DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING DEVICES FOR GENERATIVELY MANUFACTURING COMPONENTS FROM A POWDER MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12502022
BEVERAGE PREPARATION DEVICE WITH SIMPLE MULTI-THERMAL CONDITIONING
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+46.7%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 175 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