Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/278,487

OPTICAL FILTERING DEVICE, METHOD OF CONTROLLING OPTICAL FILTERING DEVICE, AND MEMS SHUTTER

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Aug 23, 2023
Examiner
BOUTSIKARIS, LEONIDAS
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Hitachi High-Tech Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
92 granted / 106 resolved
+18.8% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
131
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
53.8%
+13.8% vs TC avg
§102
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
§112
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 106 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 Statement filed on 8/23/2023 has been considered. Preliminary Amendment The preliminary amendment filed 8/23/2025 is acknowledged. In the preliminary amendment, Applicant amended the specification and claims 1, 4, 9, 13 and 15 and cancelled claims 2-3 and 10. Examiner Notes Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the Applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character not mentioned in the description: reference character “270” in Figs. 6A, 6B, 7 and 17. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The substitute specification filed 8/23/2023 is acknowledged. 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 5-8 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. Regarding claim 5, said claim depends from claim 1, which recites “the sticking prevention part is a protrusion disposed on the wall surface of the shutter opening” which is represented by Fig. 5, where the protrusion 281 is the sticking prevention part disposed on the wall surface. However, claim 5 recites “the sticking prevention part is at least one of a convex portion and a concave portion provided on the wall surface of the shutter opening”, which is represented by Figs. 10, 11, where the sticking prevention part is the convex surface 288 or the concave surface 287 provided on the wall surface. It is not clear how the embodiment shown in Fig. 5 can be consistent with the embodiments in Figs. 10, 11, that is, either the sticking prevention part is a protrusion disposed on the wall or a convex/concave surface on the wall. Moreover, claim 1 recites “any cross section in the thickness direction of the substrate has an approximately same shape”. This feature is not present in the embodiments of Figs. 10, 11 where the cross section varies. For examination purposes, it will be taken that claim 5 refers to the embodiments shown in Figs. 10, 11. Regarding claim 6, said claim depends from claim 1 (through claim 5), which recites “the sticking prevention part is a protrusion disposed on the wall surface of the shutter opening”, which is represented by Fig. 5 where the protrusion 281 is the sticking prevention part disposed on the wall surface. However, claim 6 recites “the wall surface of the shutter opening is formed to have an inclined surface so that any cross section in a thickness direction of the substrate has an approximately dogleg shape”, which is represented by Fig. 8 where the sticking prevention part is the dogleg surface 286. It is not clear how the embodiment shown in Fig. 5 can be consistent with the embodiment in Fig. 8, that is, either the sticking prevention part is a protrusion disposed on the wall or a dogleg surface on the wall. Moreover, claim 1 recites “any cross section in the thickness direction of the substrate has an approximately same shape”. This feature is not present in the embodiment of Fig. 8 where the cross section varies. For examination purposes, it will be taken that claim 6 refers to the embodiment shown in Fig. 8. Regarding claim 7, said claim depends from claim 1 (through claim 5), which recites “the sticking prevention part is a protrusion disposed on the wall surface of the shutter opening”, which is represented by Fig. 5 where the protrusion 281 is the sticking prevention part disposed on the wall surface. However, claim 7 recites “the wall surface of the shutter opening is formed to have a concave curved surface or a convex curved surface”, which is represented by Figs. 10, 11 where the sticking prevention part is the convex surface 288 or the concave surface 287. It is not clear how the embodiment shown in Fig. 5 can be consistent with the embodiments in Figs. 10, 11, that is, either the sticking prevention part is a protrusion disposed on the wall or a convex/concave curved surface on the wall. Moreover, claim 1 recites “any cross section in the thickness direction of the substrate has an approximately same shape”. This feature is not present in the embodiments of Figs. 10, 11 where the cross section varies. For examination purposes, it will be taken that claim 7 refers to the embodiments shown in Figs. 10, 11. Regarding claim 8, said claim depends from claim 1 (through claim 5) which recites “the sticking prevention part is a protrusion disposed on the wall surface of the shutter opening”, which is represented by Fig. 5 where the protrusion 281 is the sticking prevention part disposed on the wall surface. However, claim 8 recites “the wall surface of the shutter opening is formed to have a wave-shaped uneven surface”, which is represented by Fig. 12 where the sticking prevention part is the wave-shape surface 289. It is not clear how the embodiment shown in Fig. 5 can be consistent with the embodiment in Fig. 12, that is, either the sticking prevention part is a protrusion disposed on the wall or a wave-shaped surface on the wall. Moreover, claim 1 recites “any cross section in the thickness direction of the substrate has an approximately same shape”. This feature is not present in the embodiment of Fig. 12 where the cross section varies. For examination purposes, it will be taken that claim 8 refers to the embodiment shown in Fig. 12. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 4, 9 and 11-15 are allowed. Claims 5-8 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding the optical filtering device of claim 1, the optical shutter 210 has an opening 264 with side wall surfaces, wherein the sticking prevention part in a wall surface comprises a protrusion 281 that extends over the entire of a thickness direction of the substrate (Fig. 5). Regarding the MEMS shutter of claim 15, the optical shutter 210 has an opening 264 with side wall surfaces, wherein the sticking prevention part in a wall surface comprises a protrusion 281 that extends over the entire of a thickness direction of the substrate (Fig. 5). Regarding the optical filtering device of claim 5, the optical shutter 210 has an opening 264 with side wall surfaces, wherein the sticking prevention part in a wall surface comprises at least one of a convex portion and a concave portion provided on the wall surface of the shutter opening (Figs. 10, 11). Claims 6-8 are dependent from claim 5 and are allowable for the reason given above. Suzuki et al. (JP-H11249035A, hereinafter, “Suzuki”, paragraphs cited herein refer to the English translation, figures refer to the original) discloses an optical filter comprising a light shutter 11 that opens and closes a cavity 13 in a substrate 1 having an opening 13a. The side wall of the cavity 13 includes a protrusion 24 that includes a conductive member 25, a piezoelectric element 26 and an electrode 27 (Fig. 1, [0020], [0024], [0025]). The protruding portion 24 is provided at a position where the movable shutter 11 at the open position comes into contact with the wall surface ([0028]). However, Suzuki is silent as to disposing the protruding portion 24 so that it extends over the entire of a thickness direction of the substrate 1 or disposing a convex/concave portion on the side wall. Ueno et al. (US 2014/0160471, hereinafter, “Ueno”) discloses an optical filtering device wherein an optical shutter 2001 switches between closed and open state (Fig. 6A, [0194]). However, Ueno is silent as to disposing a protruding portion on the surface of the side wall or disposing a convex/concave portion on the side wall. Li et al. (US 2017/0075105, hereinafter, “Li”) discloses a micro shutter array (Abstract). In one embodiment, micro shutter cells may be in an open state (Fig. 5C, [0029]). However, Li is silent as to disposing a protruding portion on the surface of the side wall or disposing a convex/concave portion on the side wall. Worley (US 5,784,190, hereinafter, “Worley”) a micro shutter array (Abstract). In one embodiment, micro shutter cells may be in an open state (Fig. 7, col. 7, lines 29-36). However, Worley is silent as to disposing a protruding portion on the surface of the side wall 36 or disposing a convex/concave portion on the side wall. Takahashi (JP-H09218360A, hereinafter, “Takahashi”) discloses an optical filter comprising a light shutter 501a, 501b that opens and closes (Fig. 6, [0070]). However, Takahashi is silent as to disposing a protruding portion on the surface of the side wall or disposing a convex/concave portion on the side wall. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEONIDAS BOUTSIKARIS whose telephone number is (703)756-4529. The Examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fr. 9.00-5.00. 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, Stephone Allen, can be reached on 571-272-2434. 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. /L.B./ Patent Examiner, AU 2872 /STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 23, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 25, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591149
MULTIFOCAL DIFFRACTIVE OPHTHALMIC LENSES WITH EVENLY SPACED ECHELETTES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12578167
SCOPE TURRET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575726
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CHOROID-SCLERAL SEGMENTATION USING DEEP LEARNING WITH A CHOROID-SCLERAL LAYER MODEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578555
PHOTOGRAPHING LENS ASSEMBLY, IMAGE CAPTURING UNIT AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578516
LIGHT DIFFRACTION ELEMENT UNIT AND OPTICAL COMPUTATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+15.2%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 106 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