Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/195,867

Active Optical Sensor Providing Near and Far Field Target Detection

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 10, 2023
Examiner
HANNETT, JAMES M
Art Unit
2639
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Apple Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
904 granted / 1075 resolved
+22.1% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
1095
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.0%
-36.0% vs TC avg
§103
40.6%
+0.6% vs TC avg
§102
43.7%
+3.7% vs TC avg
§112
5.2%
-34.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1075 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 5/11/2023, 2/21/2024, 12/8/2025 and 1/12/2026 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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. 1: Claim(s) 1, 8-10, 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 110945378 A Munzer et al. 2: As for Claim 1, Munzer et al depicts in Figure 2 and teaches on Page 2 Paragraph 1 and Page 4 last two paragraphs and The first Paragraph on Page 5 An optical sensor module, comprising: a module housing defining, a first compartment having a first aperture (compartment enclosing element 2); and a second compartment having a second aperture (compartment enclosing element 10), the second aperture spaced apart from the first aperture; a set of one or more optical emitters (element 2) disposed in the first compartment and configured to emit light through the first aperture; a first set of one or more optical detectors (element 12) disposed in the first compartment and configured to receive a first redirected portion of the emitted light through the first aperture; a set of one or more optical elements disposed in the first compartment (element 5) and configured to direct at least a portion of the emitted light or the first redirected portion of the emitted light; and a second set of one or more optical detectors (element 10) disposed in the second compartment and configured to receive a second redirected portion of the emitted light through the second aperture. 3: As for Claim 8, Munzer et al depicts in Figure 2 and teaches on Page 2 Paragraph 1 and Page 4 last two paragraphs and The first Paragraph on Page 5 wherein: the set of one or more optical emitters (element 2) includes a first optical emitter; and the set of one or more optical elements (5) comprises an optical element having a light- receiving surface that is tilted at a non-right angle with respect to an axis of a first light emitted by the first optical emitter (2) (see depiction of emitted light in Figure 1). 4: As for Claim 9, Munzer et al depicts in Figure 2 and teaches on Page 2 Paragraph 1 and Page 4 last two paragraphs and The first Paragraph on Page 5 wherein: the set of one or more optical emitters (2) includes a first optical emitter; the first set of one or more optical detectors (10) includes a first optical detector and a second optical detector (array of SPADs); and the set of one or more optical elements (elements 5 and 11), receives a first light emitted by the first optical emitter (2); directs the first light through the first aperture; and directs a return of the first light through the first aperture to one or both of the first optical detector or the second optical detector (see depiction in Figure 1). 5: As for Claim 10, Munzer et al depicts in Figure 2 and teaches on Page 2 Paragraph 1 and Page 4 last two paragraphs and The first Paragraph on Page 5 wherein: the second set of one or more optical detectors comprises an array of optical detectors (SPAD array 10); the light received through the second aperture is received by one or more optical detectors in the array of optical detectors (10); and positions of the one or more optical detectors that receive the light through the second aperture indicate a distance of an object from which the light is returned. Munzer et al teaches on Page 1 “The invention is suitable for time-of-flight measurement field. time-of-flight (TOF) camera or sensor for time of reception after reflection at the object with the same optical signal by measuring the optical signal transmitted between the determined distance of the object. through the photoelectric detector, especially the SPAD (single photon avalanche diode) to detect the arrival of reflected signal”. 6: As for Claim 16, Munzer et al depicts in Figure 2 and teaches on Page 2 Paragraph 1 and Page 4 last two paragraphs and The first Paragraph on Page 5 A bistatic optical sensor module, comprising: an emitter compartment (compartment including emitter 2); a detector compartment (compartment including element 10; and a single-photon avalanche detector (SPAD) disposed in the emitter compartment (element 12). 7: As for Claim 20, Munzer et al depicts in Figure 2 and teaches on Page 2 Paragraph 1 and Page 4 last two paragraphs and The first Paragraph on Page 5 further comprising: an optical emitter (2) disposed in the emitter compartment; and an array of SPADs (element 10) in the detector compartment; wherein, light emitted by the optical emitter (2) and returned to the array of SPADs (10) is received by a subset of one or more SPADs in the array of SPADs (10); and positions of the SPADs in the subset of one or more SPADs indicate at least one of a distance to, or location of, an object from which the light is returned. Munzer et al teaches on Page 1 “The invention is suitable for time-of-flight measurement field. time-of-flight (TOF) camera or sensor for time of reception after reflection at the object with the same optical signal by measuring the optical signal transmitted between the determined distance of the object. through the photoelectric detector, especially the SPAD (single photon avalanche diode) to detect the arrival of reflected signal”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 8: Claim(s) 5 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 110945378 A Munzer et al in view of Official Notice. 9: As for Claim 5, Munzer et al depicts in Figure 2 and teaches on Page 2 Paragraph 1 and Page 4 last two paragraphs and the first Paragraph on Page 5 wherein: the set of one or more optical emitters (2) includes a first optical emitter; the set of one or more optical elements (5) receives and directs light emitted by the first optical emitter (2) through a surface of an optical element (5) in the set of one or more optical elements. However, the prior art does not teach the surface has an anti-reflective coating or surface treatment. Official Notice is taken that it was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form anti-reflective coatings on optical elements in ToF system in order to improve image quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form and anti-reflective coating on the optical elements 5 of Munzer et al in order to reduce internal reflections and therefore, improve image quality. 10: As for Claim 11, Munzer et al depicts in Figure 2 and teaches on Page 2 Paragraph 1 and Page 4 last two paragraphs and the first Paragraph on Page 5 wherein: the set of one or more optical emitters (2) includes an optical emitter; the first set of one or more optical detectors includes an optical detector (10). However, does not teach the optical emitter and the optical detector form parts of a self-mixing interferometry (SMI) sensor. Official Notice is taken that it was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use self-mixing interferometry (SMI) sensors for distance sensors in order to reduce costs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a self-mixing interferometry (SMI) sensor for distance sensor of Munzer et al in order to reduce costs. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 12-15 are allowed. Claims 2-4, 6, 7 and 17-19 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not teach a set of one or more polarization-dependent optical elements in the emitter compartment, the set of one or more polarization-dependent optical elements receiving light emitted by the optical emitter, emitting light having a first polarization through the first aperture, and passing light received through the first aperture and having a second polarization to the optical detector when taken in combination with all the limitations of the independent claim.. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M HANNETT whose telephone number is (571)272-7309. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM-5:00 PM Monday thru Thursday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Twyler Haskins can be reached at 571-272-7406 The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /JAMES M HANNETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639 JMH January 29, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 10, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604114
IMAGING DEVICE, OPTOELECTRONIC DEVICE AND METHOD FOR OPERATING AN IMAGING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598383
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND METHOD FOR USING CAMERA ACCORDING TO WEARING OF LENS-TYPE ACCESSORY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593118
RECEIVER FOR A SYSTEM FOR TRANSMITTING LIGHT, SYSTEM FOR TRANSMITTING LIGHT, AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A SYSTEM FOR TRANSMITTING LIGHT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593138
IMAGE SIGNAL PROCESSOR AND METHOD OF PROCESSING IMAGES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586159
MULTI-FRAME HIGH DYNAMIC RANGE (HDR) IMAGE GENERATION USING QUANTA IMAGE FRAMES
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
84%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+0.5%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1075 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