Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/264,980

METHOD OF DETECTING LIVING TISSUE ELEMENT, DEVICE OF DETECTING LIVING TISSUE ELEMENT, AND WEARABLE APPARATUS

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Aug 10, 2023
Examiner
NASSER, ROBERT L
Art Unit
3992
Tech Center
3900
Assignee
Sunrise Technologies Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
228 granted / 313 resolved
+12.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
337
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.0%
-32.0% vs TC avg
§103
45.0%
+5.0% vs TC avg
§102
7.0%
-33.0% vs TC avg
§112
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 313 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
I. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Office Action addresses U.S. Application No. 18/264980 (“’980 Application” or “instant application”). Based upon a review of the instant application, the actual filing date of the instant application is August 10, 2023. This action is being issued following Applicant’s response of 1/12/2026, which included claim amendments and arguments. II. STATUS OF CLAIMS Claims 1-95 were filed with the application. The preliminary amendment filed 8/10/2023 cancels 5, 6, 10-13, 16, 17, 19-23, 25, 26, 29-31, 34, 37-39, 41, 45-50, 52-79, 81, 82, 86, 87, and 90-92, and amends claims 3, 4, 7, 8, 14, 15, 18, 24, 27, 28, 32, 33, 35, 36, 40, 42, 43, 80, 85, 89, and 93. The amendment of 1/12/2026 amended claims 1, 32, 33, and 44 and canceled claim 4. Therefore, as of the date of this Office Action, the status of the claims is: a. Claims 1-3, 7-9, 14, 15, 18, 24, 27, 28, 32, 33, 35, 36, 40, 42-44, 51, 80, 83-85, 88, 89, and 93-95 (“Pending Claims”). III. PRIORITY AND CONTINUING DATA The ‘980 application is a national stage entry of PCT/CN2021/143507, filed December 31, 2021, which claims priority to Chinese application 2021-10185765.7, filed February 11, 2021. Because the earliest possible effective filing date is after March 16, 2013, the first to file provisions of the AIA , apply to this proceeding. V. REJECTIONS UNDER 35 USC 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. 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. Claims 1-3, 7-9, 14, 15, 1 8, 24, 27, 28, 32, 33, 35, 36, 40, 42-44, 51, 80, 83-85, 88, 89, and 93-95 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 44 recite that the each of the M photosensitive surfaces is configured to acquire the light intensity value of the exit light exited from the exit position within a predetermined anti-jitter range. The disclosure uses the same language. However, as per MPEP 2161.01 I, it is not enough that there is textual support in the disclosure for the claimed subject matter. In order to meet the written description requirement, the disclosure of a computer based invention must show the steps or algorithm for performing the claimed function. At present, there is no discussion of what the anti-jitter range is. There are no bounds of the range and it is not clear exactly what the range is. The disclosure discusses suppressing jitter. The Examiner suggests that Applicant incorporate this language into the claims. As such, the claims lack an adequate written description. . Claim 40 lacks an adequate written description in that the disclosure fails to explain the steps of forming the shape of the mask according to a jitter distribution. Claims 2, 3, 7-9, 14, 15, 18, 24, 27, 28, 32, 33, 35, 36, 42-43, 51, 80, 83-85, 88, 89, and 93-95 are rejected as being based on a rejected base claim. VIII. ALLOWABLE SUBJECT MATTER Claims 1-3, 7-9, 14, 15, 18, 24, 27, 28, 32, 33, 35, 36, 40, 42-44, 51, 80, 83-85, 88, 89, and 93-95 would be allowable if the issues under 35 USC 112 above were overcome and if rewritten into independent form. Claim 1-3, 7-9, 14, 15, 18, 24, 27, 28, 32, 33, 35, 36, 40, 42-44, 51, 80, 83-85, 88, 89, and 93-95 defines over the art of record in that none of the art has a ratio of the area of each photosensitive surface to a circumference of the photosensitive exceed the recited ratio of 0/04 mm and uses those surfaces to detect exit light. . IX. ANSWER TO ARGUMENTS As to the anti-jitter range, Applicant has asserted that the structure of the device allows the device to receive signals in a pre-determined anti-jitter range. However, that range has not been disclosed. As such, the disclosure does not establish that Applicant was in possession of the claimed invention, as not details of the range are disclosed. Further, it appears through the disclosure, such as in paragraph [0079] of US PG PUB 2024/0130676, Applicant’s structure allows the device to reduce or suppress jitter. The Examiner suggests that Applicant incorporate this concept into the claim. Applicant has asserted that a PHOSITA does not need to engage in undue experimentation to interpret or define the range. This argument misses the point. Applicant must establish that they were in possession of the claimed invention. The disclosure, without details of the range fails to establish this. As to the 112a rejection to claim 40, Applicant has asserted that a person skilled in the art can directly implement the design of the mask to correspond to the shape of the jitter distribution. The issue is whether Applicant has disclosed enough of the steps or algorithm necessary to carry out the claimed invention to establish that they were in possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. MPEP 2161.01 I. There is no discussion in the disclosure of how to correlate the shape to the shape of the jitter distribution. Therefore, claim 40 lacks an adequate written description. IX. 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 ROBERT L NASSER whose telephone number is (571)272-4731. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-6. 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, Alexander Kosowski can be reached at (571) 272-3744. 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. /ROBERT L NASSER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 10, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 12, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent RE50829
TECHNIQUES TO AUTOMATICALLY FOCUS A DIGITAL CAMERA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent RE50823
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPROVED TRACTOGRAPHY IMAGES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent RE50788
DEVICE FOR SURGICAL INSTRUMENT, HAVING SENSORS FOR THE STORAGE OF INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent RE50778
SEARCH ENGINES AND SYSTEMS WITH HANDHELD DOCUMENT DATA CAPTURE DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent RE50735
SYSTEM, DEVICE, AND METHOD FOR INITIALIZING A PLURALITY OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES USING A SINGLE PACKET
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+11.0%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 313 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