Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/174,689

METHOD FOR MACHINING A MATERIAL

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Feb 27, 2023
Examiner
SAAD, ERIN BARRY
Art Unit
1735
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Trumpf Laser- Und Systemtechnik GMBH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
903 granted / 1252 resolved
+7.1% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1291
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
44.4%
+4.4% vs TC avg
§102
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
§112
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1252 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of group I, claims 1-17 in the reply filed on 12/18/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the sequence element properties" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Are these properties the ‘specific sequence element properties’ or are these different? The Examiner requests that the Applicant please clarify. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the laser focus" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 10 recites the limitation "the sequence" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Is this referring to ‘the sequence of laser pulses’ or is this a different sequence? The Examiner requests that the Applicant please clarify. Claim 3 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “wherein the sequence element properties comprise development of the sequence element over time during the introduction of the sequence element”. The Examiner does not understand what is being claimed. How can sequence element properties comprise the development of the sequence element? Development of an element are not considered properties. Furthermore, how can the development of the sequence element over time occur during the introduction of the sequence element? The Examiner requests that the Applicant please clarify what is actually being claimed. Claim 4 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “the sequence element properties comprise time interval”. This time interval has not been previously claimed. Does the Applicant mean to say “a time interval”? The Examiner requests that the Applicant please clarify. Claim 4 recites the limitation "the preceding and/or subsequent sequence element" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 7 is indefinite because it is unclear if “a sequence element” is referring to one of the “at least two different sequence elements” from claim 1 or if this is a different sequence element. For the purpose of examination, it is one of the sequence elements from claim 1. Claim 8 is indefinite because it is unclear if “a sequence element” is referring to one of the “at least two different sequence elements” from claim 1 or if this is a different sequence element. For the purpose of examination, it is one of the sequence elements from claim 1. Claim 14 is indefinite because it is unclear if “a sequence element” is referring to one of the “at least two different sequence elements” from claim 1 or if this is a different sequence element. For the purpose of examination, it is one of the sequence elements from claim 1. Claim 15 is indefinite because it is unclear if “a sequence element” is referring to one of the “at least two different sequence elements” from claim 1 or if this is a different sequence element. For the purpose of examination, it is one of the sequence elements from claim 1. Claim 17 is indefinite because it is unclear if “a sequence” is the same sequence from claim 1 or if it is a different sequence. For the purpose of examination, it the same sequence from claim 1. Claim 17 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “the laser pulses of a sequence are introduced into the material with delay compensation”. What is meant by delay compensation? What is compensated? How is it compensated? It is unclear what is meant and requests that the Applicant please clarify this limitation. Claims 1-17 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Prior art was not found that taught or suggested the method as claimed that included the sequence elements as claimed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN B SAAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3634. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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. /ERIN B SAAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 27, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 25, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604771
DIRECT BONDING METHODS AND STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593526
CONTINUOUS STRING WELDING DEVICE FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC CELLS AND WELDING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589445
SOLDERING SYSTEM AND METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590929
AUTOMATED ULTRASONIC PRESS SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR WELDING PHYSICALLY VARIANT COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583053
ULTRASONIC SONOTRODES, METHOD FOR PRODUCING ULTRASONIC SONOTRODES, AND METHOD FOR WELDING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
72%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+19.2%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1252 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month