Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/027,388

LASER PROCESSING METHOD AND LASER PROCESSING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Mar 21, 2023
Examiner
LIU, CHRIS Q
Art Unit
3761
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Hamamatsu Photonics K K
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
258 granted / 377 resolved
-1.6% vs TC avg
Strong +42% interview lift
Without
With
+42.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
413
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
38.5%
-1.5% vs TC avg
§102
26.5%
-13.5% vs TC avg
§112
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 377 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of Group I (claims 1-7 and 9-14) in the reply filed on 02/16/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. 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 1-7 and 9-14 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. Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a first step of expanding an area irradiated with the laser light toward a first side in the objective area; and a second step of expanding the area irradiated with the laser light toward a second side different from the first side in the objective area” is indefinite. The definition of the expanding an area is unclear, and it is unclear what exact action is required for expanding the area. Regarding claim 3, the limitations “a first process of moving an irradiation spot of the laser light along each of a plurality of lines extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction and arranged in the first direction is sequentially executed from the second side to the first side to expand the area irradiated with the laser light toward the first side” and “a second process of moving the irradiation spot of the laser light along each of a plurality of lines extending in the second direction and arranged in the first direction is sequentially executed from the first side to the second side to expand the area irradiated with the laser light toward the second side” are indefinite. Each of the limitation is a long run-on sentence, and it is unclear what is included or excluded by the claim language. Regarding claims 5 and 9-10, the limitation “a third step of expanding the area irradiated with the laser light toward a third side in the objective area; and a fourth step of expanding the area irradiated with the laser light toward a fourth side different from the third side in the objective area” is indefinite. The definition of the expanding the area is unclear, and it is unclear what exact action is required for expanding the area. Regarding claims 2-7 and 9-14, the claims are rejected due to their dependency on an indefinite claim as shown above. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirano (JP 2008178888) (cited in IDS). PNG media_image1.png 410 538 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Hirano teaches a laser processing method for imparting compressive residual stress to an object along an objective area (rectangular area PQRS) on a surface of the object by irradiating the objective area with laser light (See para.[0015] “The method of superimposing and irradiating a pulsed laser beam will be described below by taking as an example the case where a rectangular area PQRS indicated by a dotted line in FIG. 3 is subjected to laser peening.”), the method comprising: a first step of expanding an area irradiated with the laser light toward a first side in the objective area (See fig.3, the aera is irradiated by laser light from left to right, such as L1, L3, L5 and L7.); and a second step of expanding the area irradiated with the laser light toward a second side different from the first side in the objective area (See fig.3, the aera is irradiated by laser light from right to left, such as L2, L4, and L6.). Regarding claim 2, Hirano teaches the first side and the second side are sides opposite each other in a first direction (see fig.3, the first side and the second side are opposite each other in a direction in x-axis.). Regarding claim 3, Hirano teaches wherein, in the first step, a first process of moving an irradiation spot of the laser light along each of a plurality of lines extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction and arranged in the first direction is sequentially executed from the second side to the first side to expand the area irradiated with the laser light toward the first side (See fig.3, the irradiation spot of the laser light is moved along a plurality of lines L1, L3, L5 and L7 extending in a direction y-axis, which is perpendicular to the direction in x-axis. The lines L1, L3, L5 and L7 arranged in the direction in x-axis is sequentially executed from the second side to the first side to expand the area irradiated with the laser light toward the first side.), and wherein, in the second step, a second process of moving the irradiation spot of the laser light along each of a plurality of lines extending in the second direction and arranged in the first direction is sequentially executed from the first side to the second side to expand the area irradiated with the laser light toward the second side (See fig.3, the irradiation spot of the laser light is moved along a plurality of lines L2, L4, and L6 extending in a direction y-axis, which is perpendicular to the direction in x-axis. The lines L2, L4, and L6 arranged in the direction in x-axis is sequentially executed from the first side to the second side to expand the area irradiated with the laser light toward the second side.). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4, 10, 12, and 14 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRIS Q LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-8241. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00. 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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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. /CHRIS Q LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 21, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589449
LASER WORKING MACHINE AND METHOD FOR MAINTAINING LASER WORKING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12569944
LASER WELDING TOOLING AND LASER WELDING SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564897
SPOT WELDING METHOD FOR MULTI-LAYERS AND SPOT WELDING APPARATUS USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558741
APPARATUS FOR A LASER WELDING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12544859
WORKPIECE PROCESSING METHOD AND PROCESSING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+42.5%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 377 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