Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/024,630

APPARATUS FOR DETACHING SUBSTRATE COMPONENTS AND SYSTEM FOR DETACHING SUBSTRATE COMPONENTS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 03, 2023
Examiner
KIM, PAUL D
Art Unit
3729
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Astec Irie Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
1346 granted / 1537 resolved
+17.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
1589
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§102
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
§112
30.9%
-9.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1537 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 Objections Claims 1-19 are objected to because of the following informalities: Re. claim 1: The phrase “for detaching substrate components” as recited in line 3 appears to be –for detaching the substrate components--. Re. claim 7: The phrase “placed in multiple stages” as recited in line 3 appears to be –placed in the multiple stages--. Appropriate correction is required. 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 3-7, 12, 14 and 17-19 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. Re. claim 3: The phrase “the winding direction” as recited in line 3 and “the winding direction” as recited in line 4 lacks antecedent basis. Re. claim 4: The phrase “many components being mounted in the front surface of the substrate” as recited in lines 3-4 renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear as to what the many components are indicated. Re. claim 5: The phrase “the screw blade rollers” as recited in line 3 lacks antecedent basis. The phrase “the front stage” as recited in line 4 and “the subsequent stage” as recited in line 5 lacks antecedent basis. Re. claim 6: The phrase “the winding direction” as recited in line 3 and “the winding direction” as recited in line 4 lacks antecedent basis. Re. claim 7: The phrase “the gap” as recited in line 3 and “the feed roller” as recited in line 4 lacks antecedent basis. Re. claim 12: The phrase “the substrates” as recited in line 3 lacks antecedent basis. Re. claim 14: The phrase “the conveyor belt” as recited in line 3 and “the mounting substrate” as recited in line 4 lacks antecedent basis. Re. claim 17: The phrase “the substrates” as recited in line 2 lacks antecedent basis. Re. claim 19: The phrase “the conveyor belt” as recited in line 2 and “the mounting substrate” as recited in line 3 lacks antecedent basis. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kajiyama et al. (US PAT. 6,311,908). Kajiyama et al. teach an apparatus for detaching substrate components, which detaches electronic components mounted on a substrate, wherein the apparatus (1, Fig. 1) for detaching substrate components (M, Fig. 1) comprises a screw blade roller with a screw blade (25, Fig. 3) attached to a rotary shaft (33, Fig. 3), wherein the screw blade roller comes into contact with the electronic components mounted on the substrate (W) and detaches the electronic components while the screw blade roller rotates (col. 6, lines 5-19 and col. 6, line 64 to col. 7, line 47). Re. claim 2: Two or more screw blades are arranged as shown in Fig. 3. Re. claim 3: The winding direction of the screw blade in one side of the screw blade roller is opposite to the winding direction of the screw blade in the other side of the screw blade roller as shown in Fig. 3 (see also col. 2, lines 39-45). Re. claim 4: The screw blade roller is placed in a front surface of the substrate, wherein the components are mounted in the front surface of the substrate, and wherein a feed roller (2a and 13, such that the substrate is pushed and carried the substrate by the plate) supporting a back surface of the substrate is placed in the back surface of the substrate as shown in Fig. 1. Re. claim 5: The screw blade rollers (10, 11, 12) are placed in multiple stages, wherein the substrate enters the screw blade roller in the front stage and then entering the screw blade roller in the subsequent stage as shown in Fig. 1 (col. 5, line 67 to col. 6, line 4). Re. claim 6: The winding direction of the screw blade of the screw blade roller in an odd numbered stage is opposite to the winding direction of the screw blade of the screw blade roller in an even numbered stage as shown in Figs. 1 and 3. 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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kajiyama et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Knofe et al. (PGPub 2017/0164465 A1). Kajiyama et al. teach all limitations as set forth above, but silent a substrate heating apparatus. Knofe et al. teach a process of electronic component including a substrate heating apparatus for melting a connecting material (such as a solder) in order to remove at least one component from the substrate (col. 2, lines 3-14). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify an apparatus for detaching substrate components of Kajiyama et al. by a substrate heating apparatus as taught by Knofe et al. in order to assist removing at least one component from the substrate. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7, 12, 14, 17 and 19 are would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 16 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The Prior Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Doherty et al. (PGPub 2010/0220983 A1), Kubota et al. (US PAT. 8,861,991), and Mackay (US PAT. 7,288,471) are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to a system for detaching substrate components. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL D KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-4565. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 6:00 AM-2:00 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, Aneeta Yodichkas can be reached at 571-272-9773. 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. /PAUL D KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 03, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603212
METHOD OF MAKING A SHIELDED INDUCTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597553
MANUFACTURING METHOD OF SURFACE-MOUNT INDUCTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597550
Optimized Electromagnetic Inductor Component Design and Methods Including Improved Conductivity Composite Conductor Material
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588944
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING A TIP ELECTRODE OF AN ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY CATHETER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588178
PRODUCTION SYSTEM
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
88%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+6.6%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1537 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