Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/006,904

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ALIGNING ARRAYS OF OPTICAL FIBERS

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 26, 2023
Examiner
RAYMOND, BRITTANY L
Art Unit
1722
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Soreq Nuclear Research Center
OA Round
2 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
774 granted / 1006 resolved
+11.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1039
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
52.8%
+12.8% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.3%
-23.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1006 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . 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 1-12 are 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 1 recites the limitation "said conical structures" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is previously referred to as a conical pattern. Additionally, the “voids” appears to be the same things as the “conical apertures” in the photoresist layer. It would be clearer if a single term was used for these spaces. If the claims are amended to use the term, “conical apertures”, claims 3 would need to be amended as well. Regarding claim 1, it is unclear how the metal sheet is attached to the photoresist layer because the specification states that the photoresist pattern is removed after filling with the metal and before attaching the metal sheet. Additionally, the specification describes that the conical apertures are formed in the metal layer that is formed after filling the voids between the photoresist patterns, and removing the photoresist pattern. The conical openings of the attached metal sheet are then aligned with the conical apertures in the metal layer rather than the photoresist layer. Claim 1 needs to be amended to match the language and steps of the specification. Claim 5 recites the limitation "said metallic coating" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This should also read, “conical metallic coating” to match claim 4. Response to Arguments The amendments made to the claims, filed on 11/4/2025, have overcome the 35 USC 112 rejections that were presented in the last Office Action. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, the amendments have created additional 35 USC 112 issues. Applicant’s arguments, filed 11/4/2025, with respect to the 35 USC 103 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-12 have been withdrawn. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY L RAYMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-6545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am-6 pm. 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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. BRITTANY L. RAYMOND Primary Examiner Art Unit 1722 /BRITTANY L RAYMOND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 26, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Nov 04, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603324
LOCALIZED HIGH SALT CONCENTRATION ELECTROLYTE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598747
FABRICATING THREE-DIMENSIONAL SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592434
Apparatus and Method for Shaping Pouch Film for Secondary Batteries
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586807
FUEL CELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585192
IMPRINT METHOD FOR FABRICATION OF LOW DENSITY NANOPORE MEMBRANE
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+10.9%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1006 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