Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 18/160,086

IMAGING DEVICE, MANUFACTURING METHOD, AND SUBSTRATE DIVIDING METHOD

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jan 26, 2023
Priority
Jul 24, 2015 — JP 2015-147145 +5 more
Examiner
MENZ, DOUGLAS M
Art Unit
2897
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Sony Group Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allowance Rate
704 granted / 794 resolved
+20.7% vs TC avg
Minimal +5% lift
Without
With
+4.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
816
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§103
39.0%
-1.0% vs TC avg
§102
49.1%
+9.1% vs TC avg
§112
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 794 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . 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, 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sano et al. (US 2011/0147782). Regarding claim 1, Sano discloses an imaging device (figs. 1, 2A, 4 and Abstract and paragraph 0003), comprising: a first substrate (4, figs.2A, 4, 6A-C and paragraph 0047); and a second substrate (1, figs. 2A, 4, 6A-C and paragraph 0047) adjacent to the first substrate, wherein a first side wall of the second substrate (right side of 1, figs. 2A, 4) comprises a blade diced portion and is devoid of any stealth diced portion (top right side of 1 has only blade diced portion, figs. 2A, 4, 6B and paragraph 0088) and a second side wall of the second substrate (left side of 1, figs. 2A, 4) comprises a stealth diced portion and is devoid of any blade diced portion (bottom left side of 1 has only stealth diced portion, figs. 2A, 4, 6B-C and paragraphs 0089-0090), wherein the first and second walls are different side walls of the second substrate (right side and left side of 1, figs. 2A, 4). Regarding claim 2, Sano further discloses wherein the first substrate (4, fig. 4) is disposed between a transparent layer (lens on top of 4, fig. 4) and the second substrate (1, fig. 4 and paragraphs 0067-0071). Regarding claim 10, Sano further discloses a solder resist disposed on a bottom surface of the second substrate (15, figs. 2A, 5G, 6C and paragraph 0083). Response to Arguments First, Examiner thanks Applicant for amending the withdrawn claims in the same fashion as the pending rejected claims. Such practice will help facilitate a quick rejoinder should allowable subject matter be found. Applicant's arguments filed 6/18/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended the independent claim to include the limitations that a first side wall of the second substrate comprises a blade diced portion and is devoid of any stealth diced portion and a second side wall of the second substrate comprises a stealth diced portion and is devoid of any blade diced portion, and argues that Sano does not disclose such features. Examiner disagrees, as mentioned in the above rejection, Sano discloses a blade diced portion of substrate 1 (fig. 6A) and a stealth diced portion of substrate 1 (fig. 6B), the blade diced portion affects only the top side wall of substrate 1, and the stealth diced portion affects only the bottom side wall of substrate 1, meaning the top side wall of substrate 1 is devoid of any stealth diced portion and the bottom side wall of substrate 1 is devoid of any blade diced portion. This is analogous to Applicant’s fig. 23 and paragraph 0266 mentioned in the arguments. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS M MENZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1877. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-5:00pm. 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, Jacob Choi can be reached at 469-295-9060. 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. /DOUGLAS M MENZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897 8/8/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 26, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Apr 08, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 21, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102
Jun 18, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 08, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12745521
DISPLAY APPARATUS AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12745488
EPITAXIAL STRUCTURE OF LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
3y 1m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12733552
DISPLAY DEVICE, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME, AND TILED DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING THE SAME
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12727520
Backlight and Display System
2y 11m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12713802
DISPLAY PANEL
3y 1m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+4.7%)
2y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 794 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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