Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/920,856

POROUS GLASS MEMBER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 06, 2023
Examiner
MILLER, CAMERON KENNETH
Art Unit
1731
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Nippon Electric Glass Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
258 granted / 321 resolved
+15.4% vs TC avg
Minimal -0% lift
Without
With
+-0.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
65 currently pending
Career history
386
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
47.7%
+7.7% vs TC avg
§102
19.8%
-20.2% vs TC avg
§112
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 321 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 Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1, claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 12/22/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 10-14 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoji et al. (JP2013203554A with reference to machine translation, first cited in the restriction requirement dated 11/12/2025, hereinafter referred to as Shoji). Regarding claim 1, Shoji discloses a porous glass member (see Shoji at the Abstract, disclosing a porous glass molded body) containing, in terms of % by mass, over 0% ZrO2+TiO2+Al2O3+BeO+Cr2O3+Ga2O3+CeO2 (See Shoji at the Abstract, disclosing 0-10 wt.% of Al2O3, which overlaps with the claimed range.) In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05). While Shoji does not explicitly disclose a light transmittance of over 1% at any one of wavelengths from 200 to 2600 nm at a thickness of 0.5 mm, Shoji at Fig. 3 and the last two paragraphs of page 3 from the machine translation shows a transmittance of over 90% at 500nm for a glass with a thickness of 0.3 mm. A transmittance of over 90% at 500nm for a glass with a thickness of 0.3 mm would inherently possess a light transmittance of over 1% at any one of wavelengths from 200 to 2600 nm at a thickness of 0.5 mm. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established (see MPEP 2112.01(I) first paragraph). Regarding claim 2, Shoji discloses containing over 0% by mass ZrO2+TiO2+Al2O3 (See Shoji at the Abstract, disclosing 0-10 wt.% of Al2O3, which overlaps with the claimed range.). Regarding claim 3, while Shoji does not explicitly disclose a light transmittance of over 1% at any one of wavelengths from 350 to 800 nm at a thickness of 0.5 mm, Shoji at Fig. 3 and the last two paragraphs of page 3 from the machine translation shows a transmittance of over 90% at 500nm for a glass with a thickness of 0.3 mm. A transmittance of over 90% at 500nm for a glass with a thickness of 0.3 mm would inherently possess a light transmittance of over 1% at any one of wavelengths from 350 to 800 nm at a thickness of 0.5 mm. Regarding claim 4, while Shoji does not explicitly disclose a light transmittance of over 1% at any one of wavelengths from 350 to 450 nm at a thickness of 0.5 mm, Shoji at Fig. 3 and the last two paragraphs of page 3 from the machine translation shows a transmittance of over 90% at 450nm for a glass with a thickness of 0.3 mm. A transmittance of over 90% at 500nm for a glass with a thickness of 0.3 mm would inherently possess a light transmittance of over 1% at any one of wavelengths from 350 to 450 nm at a thickness of 0.5 mm. Regarding claim 5, while Shoji does not explicitly disclose a light transmittance of 0.1% or more at a wavelength of 400 nm at a thickness of 0.5 mm, Shoji at Fig. 3 and the last two paragraphs of page 3 from the machine translation shows a transmittance of over 80% at 400nm for a glass with a thickness of 0.3 mm. A light transmittance of 0.1% or more at a wavelength of 400 nm at a thickness of 0.5 mm would inherently possess a light transmittance of over 1% at any one of wavelengths from 350 to 450 nm at a thickness of 0.5 mm. Regarding claim 6, while Shoji does not explicitly disclose a scaffold diameter of 1 to 45 nm, the glass of Shoji is made by a method substantially identical to the instantly disclosed method at [0042] of the instant PGPub, which states the porous glass according to the present invention can be obtained, for example, by thermally treating a glass base material to separate it into two phases: a silica-rich phase and a boron oxide-rich phase, and removing the boron oxide-rich phase with an acid. At the fourth paragraph under the description of page 2 from the machine translation, Shoji teaches a technique for obtaining a molded body in which porous glass is subjected to phase separation treatment by heating, and then acid-treated to make the glass layer porous. Shoji discloses an acid treatment at the acid treatment section of page 4 from the machine translation. Additionally, the instant composition as detailed by the Abstract for a glass member contains, in terms of % by mass, over 0% ZrO2+TiO2+Al2O3+BeO+Cr2O3+Ga2O3+CeO2 is substantially identical to the composition at the Abstract from the machine translation of Shoji which discloses main material includes 40-75 wt.% of SiO2 and 10-30 wt.% of B2O3. Glass as a raw material is obtained by adding 0-10 wt.% of Al2O3, 0-5 wt.% of CaO, 0-10 wt.% of Na2O and 0-15 wt.% of K2O to the main material. The instant specification at [0014]-[0016] of the instant PGPub also discloses the scaffold diameter is a function of the pore diameter and the porosity. Because the glass of Shoji is treated by an acid etching process substantially identical to the instant process as detailed above, and the composition of Shoji is substantially identical to the instantly disclosed composition as detailed above, the glass of Shoji would inherently possess a porosity substantially identical to the instant porosity. Furthermore, instant claim 8 discloses a pore diameter of 1 to 50 nm, which is substantially identical to Shoji at the Abstract disclosing a pore size of 30 nm. As such, because the porosity and pore diameter of Shoji are substantially identical to the instant porosity and pore diameter, the glass of Shoji would inherently possess the claimed scaffold diameter. Regarding claim 7, Shoji discloses containing, in terms of % by mass, 50 to less than 100% SiO2 (see Shoji at the Abstract, disclosing 40-75 wt.% of SiO2, which is within the claimed range.), over 0 to 30% ZrO2 (Shoji does not disclose ZrO2, which corresponds to 0% ZrO2, which is within the claimed range.), and 0 to 20% Al2O3 (See Shoji at the Abstract, disclosing 0-10 wt.% of Al2O3, which overlaps with the claimed range.). Regarding claim 8, Shoji discloses having a pore diameter of 1 to 50 nm (See Shoji at the Abstract, disclosing a pore size is 30 nm or less, which overlaps with the claimed range). Regarding claim 9, while Shoji does not explicitly disclose the porous glass being applied for sensing using an absorbance change at a wavelength of 350 to 450 nm, Examiner notes a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim (See MPEP 2114(II)). In the instant case of claim 9, being applied for sensing using an absorbance change at a wavelength of 350 to 450 nm does not differentiate the claimed glass from the glass of Shoji because the glass of Shoji teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMERON K MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4616. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am - 5:00pm 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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-3149. 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. CAMERON K MILLER Examiner Art Unit 1731 /CAMERON K MILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 06, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600674
ALUMINA PARTICLES, RESIN COMPOSITION, MOLDED BODY, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING ALUMINA PARTICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600664
GLASS-CERAMICS WITH HIGH ELASTIC MODULUS AND HARDNESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594223
GRADIENT COMPOSITION ZIRCONIA DENTAL MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590039
Glazing Material
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583784
Li2O-Al2O3-SiO2-BASED CRYSTALLIZED GLASS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (-0.3%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 321 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