Office Action Predictor
Application No. 18/092,187

HOLMIUM-DOPED FIBER AMPLIFIER WITH EFFICIENT LOW COST CASCADED FIBER LASER PUMPING AND A METHOD THEREFOR

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Dec 30, 2022
Examiner
HUGHES, DEANDRA M
Art Unit
3992
Tech Center
3900
Assignee
Optiwave Systems INC.
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

78%
Career Allow Rate
138 granted / 177 resolved
Without
With
+19.2%
Interview Lift
avg trend
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
21 pending
198
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.8%
-36.2% vs TC avg
§103
21.7%
-18.3% vs TC avg
§102
14.0%
-26.0% vs TC avg
§112
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§112
FINAL REJECTION Acknowledgements 1. This final rejection is in response to the claim amendments and remarks filed Dec. 31, 2025. 2. The claim amendments filed Dec. 31, 2025 (“DEC 2025 CLAIM AMENDMENTS”) have been entered. Claims 1, 3, and 5-22 are pending. These claims are grouped as follows: claims 1 and 17-22; claims 3 and 5-6; and claims 7-16. 2. Applicant claims priority under 35 USC §119(e) to Provisional App. No. 63/305,190 filed on Jan. 31, 2022. 3. The presumed effective filing date of the instant application is Jan. 31, 2022, which is the filing date of the provisional application. Response to Remarks filed Dec. 31, 2025 4. The DEC 2025 CLAIM AMENDMENTS have overcome the §103 rejections. Thus, they are withdrawn. Claim Interpretation 5. Claims 5, 6, 17, and 18 are presumed to invoke §112(f) because it uses the clause “means for” clause followed by purely functional language. As to claims 5 and 17, the corresponding structure is TOF1. As to claims 6 and 18, the corresponding structure is TOF2. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 6. Claims 11-13, 19-21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. As to claims 11-13 and 19-21, the clause “…varying one or more of:…a concentration of Er3+…” is indefinite because it is unclear whether the Er3+ concentration of “the EDF” is being varied or alternatively, whether the concentration of Er3+ of some other fiber is being varied. The similar reasoning is the basis for the indefinite rejection of the clauses pertaining to the Tm3+ and Ho3+ concentrations. Examiners suggest amending the claims to read, e.g., “…varying one or more of:…a concentration of Er3+ of the EDF…” to overcome this rejection. Similar language should be used for the Tm3+ and Ho3+ claims. As to claim 22, the clause “for use of amplifying…” is indefinite because it unclear whether this applies to the input signal. As it is claimed, it is merely intended use and does not further limit base claim 1. Examiners suggest amending this claim to “further comprising an input signal at about 2µm.” Allowable Subject Matter 7. Claims 1, 3, and 5-10, and 14-18 are allowed because the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “the preceding cascaded pumping stage comprises an Erbium-doped fiber (EDF) pumped 15 at one of the 980nm or 1480nn, and emitting a first output signal at 1620nm; the succeeding cascaded pumping stage comprises a Thulium-doped fiber (TDF) pumped by the first output signal from the EDF at 1620nm, and emitting a second output signal at 1950nm; and the second output signal from the TDF at 1950nm is used to pump the HDF” in combination with the other limitations of the claims. Claim 7 is merely the method of normal operation of claim 3. As such, claim 7 is allowed for the same reason as 3. Conclusion 8. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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. 9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEANDRA M HUGHES whose telephone number is (571)272-6982. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-Th 8AM-6PM. 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, Hetul Patel can be reached at 571-272-4184. 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. Signed: /DEANDRA M HUGHES/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3992 Conferees:
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 30, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 31, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Final Rejection — §112
Apr 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12597089
IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS AND RELATED DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent RE50852
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR VIEWING SPORTS CONTENT WITHIN A VIRTUAL REALITY ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent RE50813
LIQUID SUPPLYING DEVICE HAVING TANK AND CARTRIDGE ATTACHABLE THERETO
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560770
Optical Coupling
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12554078
Optical Coupling
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate 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
78%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+19.2%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 177 resolved cases by this examiner