Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/047,701

COMPOSITE SUBSTRATE FOR PHOTONIC CRYSTAL ELEMENT, AND PHOTONIC CRYSTAL ELEMENT

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Oct 19, 2022
Examiner
WONG, ERIC K
Art Unit
2874
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
NGK Insulators Ltd.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
765 granted / 911 resolved
+16.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
955
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
48.3%
+8.3% vs TC avg
§102
40.3%
+0.3% vs TC avg
§112
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 911 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/24/2025 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/24/2025 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) in the previous office action have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of a Double Patenting issue below. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,436,336 in view of US 9,239,424. Although the claims at issue are not identical, the only difference if the recitation of the optical loss-suppressing and cavity processing layer comprising a-Si, polycrystalline silicon or mixtures thereof. It is first noted that such layers are common in the art that comprise polycrystalline silicon as a well known material. Secondly, ‘336 discloses in the Specification that these materials are required for a joining interface (“Joining Portion”; Specification). Finally, the use of such a joining material is disclosed in ‘424 to create a high optical gain and high absorption suited for a given application defined by a given target wavelength (column 13, lines 37-67) and therefore obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use such a material as a joining layer. Claim 11 is similarly rejected as this claim only adds the language that describes the joining layer itself. Remaining claims are rejected on their dependency. Allowable Subject Matter Claims would be allowed with the filing of a Terminal Disclaimer. The prior art lacks the electro-optic crystal substrate, joining portion and cavity with the materials and arrangement claimed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric K Wong whose telephone number is (571)272-2363. The examiner can normally be reached M-Tu, Th-F 8A-6P. 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, Thomas Hollweg can be reached at 571-270-1739. 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. ERIC K. WONG Primary Examiner Art Unit 2874 /Eric Wong/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 19, 2022
Application Filed
Jul 05, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Oct 30, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 16, 2024
Final Rejection — §DP
Feb 14, 2025
Interview Requested
Feb 27, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 27, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Aug 04, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §DP
Dec 03, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 05, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 24, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12585063
WAVEGUIDE STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576447
OPTICAL FIBER MODULES FOR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577143
ANTI-RESONANCE ELEMENT PREFORM FOR PRODUCING AN ANTI-RESONANT HOLLOW-CORE FIBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571977
MULTIPORTS AND OTHER DEVICES HAVING OPTICAL CONNECTION PORTS WITH SECURING FEATURES AND METHODS OF MAKING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12566306
Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) Sensor System Including Integrated Chip
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+9.2%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 911 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