Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/041,977

MANUFACTURING AN OPTICAL ELEMENT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 16, 2023
Examiner
PARBADIA, BALRAM T
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
AMS-OSRAM AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
391 granted / 525 resolved
+6.5% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
558
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
58.6%
+18.6% vs TC avg
§102
31.2%
-8.8% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 525 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02/16/2023 and 05/10/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. 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, 2, 4-6, and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (2018/0095193, of record). Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a method of manufacturing an optical element (at least Figures 7, 8A, and 8B), the method comprising: providing a substrate (302) (Figure 8A, 850, transparent substrate); providing a tool (315,335) (860, mold) comprising, on a first side (862, side), a section defining a surface structure of the optical element (864, lens-shaped recesses); aligning the tool and the substrate with respect to each other and bringing the tool and a first side of the substrate together (810, diagram), with material between the tool and the substrate (640, light-curable lens resin); positioning a transparent masking structure (318) adjacent to the substrate onto which the material has adhered (topmost layer of 850, transparent substrate, which includes apertures and 856, opaque coating; the apertures between 856, opaque coating, may be considered transparent), the masking structure comprising a masking layer (313) (856, opaque coating); emitting light (314) through the masking structure to be incident on a portion (304) of the material to cure said potion of the material (Figure 8B, 670, light), wherein the masking layer prevents light from being incident on a remaining portion (306) of the material such that the remaining portion of the material is uncured (814, diagram; [0057] teaches a remaining uncured lens resin over the opaque coating); and removing the uncured remaining portion of the material ([0057] teaches dissolving the uncured lens resin). Regarding claim 2, Wang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the masking structure is positioned below the substrate (802, diagram) such that the light is incident on a second side of the substrate, opposite the first side, before being incident on the portion (304) of the material (812, diagram, depicts 670, light, is incident on 858, side, of 850, transparent substrate, which is opposite to the surface of 850, transparent substrate, that contacts 860, mold). Regarding claim 4, Wang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein said removing comprises washing the uncured remaining portion of the material away with a solvent ([0057] teaches dissolving the uncured lens resin with an appropriate solvent). Regarding claim 5, Wang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein said removing comprises extracting the uncured remaining portion of the material via one or more channels (402, 404, 406) (at least [0057] teaches the uncured lens resin is considered to be lens resin deposited in or forced into 868, overflow recesses, which is then dissolved with an appropriate solvent). Regarding claim 6, Wang discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the tool comprises said one or more channels (402,404) (8868, overflow recesses). Regarding claim 10, Wang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the masking layer is made of metal ([0024] teaches 126, opaque coating, is made of chromium or another metal). Regarding claim 11, Wang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the light is collimated light ([0044] teaches setting a specific distance between the mold and transparent substrate in order to maintain perfect collimation of 670, light). Regarding claim 12, Wang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the light is ultraviolet light ([0040] teaches 640, light-curable lens resin is a UV light curable resin, thus it is interpreted that 670, light is UV light). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (2018/0095193, of record) in view of Louh (2010/0014165). Regarding claim 3, Wang discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the tool is made of a transparent material, and the masking structure is positioned above the tool such that the light passes through the tool before being incident on the portion (304) of the material. Wang and Louh are related because both teach a method of manufacturing an optical element. Louh teaches a method wherein the tool is made of a transparent material, and the masking structure is positioned above the tool such that the light passes through the tool before being incident on the portion (304) of the material (Figure 6, [0020] teaches 20, pressing mold, passes UV light in order to solidify 18, molding material; Figure 5 depicts 60, light blocking film, positioned above 20, pressing mold). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Wang to incorporate the teachings of Louh and provide wherein the tool is made of a transparent material, and the masking structure is positioned above the tool such that the light passes through the tool before being incident on the portion (304) of the material. Doing so would allow for the manufacturing of durable small lenses that are not prone to bending or cracking. Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (2018/0095193, of record) in view of Yamada et al. (2003/0021042). Regarding claim 7, Wang discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the tool comprises a first portion (320) made of a first material (870, opaque polymer mold) and a second portion (330) made of a second material (872, rigid backer). Wang fails to teach the said one or more channels (402) extend through both the first portion and the second portion. Wang and Yamada are related because both teach a method of manufacturing an optical element. Yamada teaches a method wherein one or more channels (402) extend through both the first portion and the second portion (Figure 2A, 192, passage). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Wang to incorporate the teachings of Yamada and provide said one or more channels (402) extend through both the first portion and the second portion. Doing so would allow for the lens material to efficiently and effectively fill into the manufacturing device prior to curing. Regarding claim 8, Wang discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the tool comprises a first portion (320) made of a first material (870, opaque polymer mold) and a second portion (330) made of a second material (872, rigid backer). Wang fails to teach the said one or more channels (404) extend through the second portion and along an interface between the first portion and the second portion of the tool. Wang and Yamada are related because both teach a method of manufacturing an optical element. Yamada teaches a method wherein the said one or more channels (404) extend through the second portion and along an interface between the first portion and the second portion of the tool (Figure 2A, 192, passage). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Wang to incorporate the teachings of Yamada and provide said one or more channels (404) extend through the second portion and along an interface between the first portion and the second portion of the tool. Doing so would allow for the lens material to efficiently and effectively fill into the manufacturing device prior to curing. Claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (2018/0095193, of record) in view of Kintz et al. (8,189,277). Regarding claim 9, Wang discloses the method of claim 5, but fails to teach wherein the substrate comprises said one or more channels (406). Wnag and Kintz are related because both teach a method of manufacturing an optical element. Kintz teaches a method wherein the substrate comprises said one or more channels (406) (at least Figure 4G, 404''', wells, are provided on 402''', substrate). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Wang to incorporate the teachings of Kintz and provide wherein the substrate comprises said one or more channels (406). Doing so would allow for the lens material to efficiently and effectively fill into the manufacturing device prior to curing. Claims 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (2018/0095193, of record) in view of Arai (2013/0062800). Regarding claim 13, Wang discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the transparent masking structure is made of glass. Wang and Arai are related because both teach a method of manufacturing an optical element. Arai teaches a method wherein the transparent masking structure is made of glass ([0110] teaches masking 3, glass substrate, thus teaching a glass substrate for the masking structure). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Wang to incorporate the teachings of Arai and provide wherein the transparent masking structure is made of glass. Doing so would allow for improved removal of the masking structure to produce the final optical product. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yabuki (8,728,712) teaches a relevant method for manufacturing and optical element. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BALRAM T PARBADIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0602. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday. 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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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. /BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 16, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601866
POLARIZING PLATE AND OPTICAL DISPLAY DEVICE COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596228
MEMS-DRIVEN OPTICAL PACKAGE WITH MICRO-LED ARRAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596209
LIGHT CONTROL FILM INCLUDING OPTICAL CAVITIES CONTAINING LIQUID
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588172
DISPLAY DEVICE AND HEAD-UP DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578508
OPTICAL ARTICLE HAVING A MULTILAYERED ANTIREFLECTIVE COATING INCLUDING AN ENCAPSULATED METAL FILM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
74%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+20.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 525 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