Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/766,634

BONDED BODY MANUFACTURING METHOD AND BONDED BODY MANUFACTURING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
May 10, 2023
Examiner
DEHGHAN, QUEENIE S
Art Unit
1741
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Nippon Electric Glass Co., Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
73%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
519 granted / 839 resolved
-3.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
891
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
52.9%
+12.9% vs TC avg
§102
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
§112
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 839 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on October 30, 2025 has been entered. Specification The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Objections Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “further comprising” in line 6 is not used appropriately, since there is no recitation of any limitations for the device beforehand to require the term “further comprising”. Furthermore more, reciting “further comprising” in line 6 before reciting “said …device comprising” in line 9 is grammatically incorrect. Additionally, the limitation of the position member appears to be inappropriately placed in the claim, as it is currently recited in the preamble of the claim. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 12 recites the urging members are arranged below and inside the positioning member. It does not appear the specification offers support for urging members arranged inside the positioning members. The figures disclose the urging members are arranged below the positioning member, but not inside. Also, paragraph [0054] suggests the positioning member has a frame shape and has, in its inside, a storage space 26a, for storing the laminate and paragraph [0042] recites the plungers are arranged below the positioning member. 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. Claim 12 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 12 recites the limitation "the position" and “the laminate” in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Arakawa (WO 2018/220909, as provided by applicant) in view of Yamaguichi (WO 02056352 machine translation provided). Arakawa discloses a manufacturing device for bonding a body comprising a jig main body (9) having a storage part, and a pressing transparent member (7) that is to be placed in the storage part, wherein the storage part having a bottom in which plural urging members (12) are arranged. The storage part is configured to store a laminate so as to be sandwiched and pressed between the transparent member and the urging members ([0027]-[0032],[0048]-[0053], figures 4-6). Arakawa further teaches a positioning member placed in the storage part (i.e. 9c/9d in figure 6a), the positioning member defining a position that the laminate is placed (figures 3-6). As can be seen in figures 5-6, the pressing transparent member (7) is place on a second surface of a laminate, opposite of a first surface that faces the urging members, and the pressing transparent member is configured to press the second surface to cause the first surface to be pressed by urging forces of the plural urging members ([0032]). The bonded body including a plurality of packages partitioned by the bonding part is considered a material to be worked upon and does not contribute to the structural limitations of the claimed apparatus. Since the pressing transparent member and the urging members are configured to press a laminate therebetween, it can produce the bonded body. Also seen in figure 6, the urging members are arranged below and inside the positioning member. Arakawa teaches forming a plurality of bonded bodies and using a plurality of urging members to accommodate variations in the laminates to ensure proper sealing for each of the laminates ([0022]). Thus, Arakawa doesn’t specify a single urging plate placed between the plural urging members and the laminate. Like Arakawa, Yamaguichi also teaches a manufacturing device for bonding a body, the device comprising a jig main body (24) having a storage part (S), the storage part configured to store a laminate and having a bottom in which plural urging members (58/59) are arranged, and a single urging plate (44) being placed between the plural urging members and a laminate, wherein the laminate is pressed by urging forces of the plural urging members via the single urging plate (1st passage on page 5, last passage on page 5, 6th passage on page 6, figures 1-2). Yamaguichi teaches making one bonded body and employs plural urging members to ensure proper sealing of the laminate while preventing air entrapment in the bonded body. More specifically, Yamaguichi teaches coordinating the plural urging members such that the urging plate a pressing force in an arching manner to allow air to escape while sealing the laminate (bottom half of page 6). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have alternatively provided for the arrangement of a plurality of urging members and a single urging plate for providing a pressing force in forming a bonded body, especially when used for making a larger single bonded body, as it allow for proper sealing while preventing air entrapment in the bonded body, as taught by Yamaguichi. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed October 30, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the combination of Arakawa and Yamaguichi would render Arakawa inoperable, as adding a single plate would not allow for proper bonding of containers having various thicknesses and shapes. This is not found persuasive because as demonstrated by Yamaguichi, the plurality of urging members can be operated in conjunction with a single plate so that subsequential urging members are moved in a gradual manner to ensure no air gets trapped in the bonding. Because the claim is directed to an apparatus, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to provide for the combination of the features of a plurality of urging members and a single urging plate as Yamaguichi teaches such a combination can be used to provide bonding of a single container in a gradual manner, while ensuring no air gets trapped. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUEENIE S DEHGHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8209. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:30. 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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached at 571-270-7001. 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. /QUEENIE S DEHGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 10, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jul 03, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 11, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Sep 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 30, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 04, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 18, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 18, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600658
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PLATINUM FREE MELTING OF HIGH INDEX GLASSES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595200
MOLTEN GLASS TRANSPORT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590025
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PROCESSING GLASS ELEMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590028
METHOD FOR TREATMENT OF A GLASS SUBSTRATE WITH IMPROVED EDGE STRENGTH
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12570565
GLASS TUBE CONVERTING PROCESS WITH PIERCING DURING INDEX
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
62%
Grant Probability
73%
With Interview (+11.1%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 839 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