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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9, 16-20 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-9 and 10-13, filed 4/17/2026, with respect to claims 16-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 103 and 112 rejections of claims 16-20 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, regarding claim 10 filed 4/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, on page 10 of the reply, Lee fails to disclose moving the protection window during emission of the laser. However, Lee discloses moving the protection window to remove region PA1 out of the path of the beam and PA2 into the path of the beam. The detection is performed during a time when machining is performed on the substrate and the regions are shifted in order to continuously perform laser machining using the second region PA2, rather than the contaminated region PA1. This would mean the window is moved during the laser emission process. (See Paragraphs [0115]-[0121])
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.
Claim(s) 10, 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al (US 2021/0053159).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses, A laser etching method, comprising: loading a substrate in a laser etching apparatus (Fig 8 shows a substrate (SUB) being loaded into a laser etching apparatus); performing a first emission process by emitting a laser beam from a laser module toward the substrate (Fig 8 also shows a laser beam being emitted from a laser module LM toward the substrate); and moving a protection window between the substrate and the laser module, during the performing the first emission process (A window PW1 is moved between the substrate and the laser module, See Figs 8 and 10, See Paragraph [0109]-[0111]). Lee also discloses moving the protection window to remove region PA1 out of the path of the beam and PA2 into the path of the beam. The detection is performed during a time when machining is performed on the substrate and the regions are shifted in order to continuously perform laser machining using the second region PA2, rather than the contaminated region PA1. This would mean the window is moved during the laser emission process. (See Paragraphs [0115]-[0121]) Regarding claims 13-15, the beam would be stopped and the moving of the window would stop. However, the window continuing moving as it would be replaced with another window. Therefore, the window is stopped and subsequently moved in the same process.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-12 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
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN W JENNISON whose telephone number is (571)270-5930. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-5.
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.
/BRIAN W JENNISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 6/11/2026
Prosecution Insights