Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/281,722

System and Method for Variable FFT Analysis Windows in Mass Spectrometry

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Sep 12, 2023
Examiner
CHOI, JAMES J
Art Unit
2878
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
DH TECHNOLOGIES DEVELOPMENT PTE. LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
250 granted / 374 resolved
-1.2% vs TC avg
Strong +47% interview lift
Without
With
+47.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
63 currently pending
Career history
437
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
63.6%
+23.6% vs TC avg
§102
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
§112
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 374 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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 without traverse of Group I, claims 1-7, 11, in the reply filed on 12/3/25 is acknowledged. Status of the Application Claim(s) 1-7, 11 is/are pending. Claim(s) 1-7, 11 is/are rejected. Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): PNG media_image1.png 120 1248 media_image1.png Greyscale The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: PNG media_image2.png 89 869 media_image2.png Greyscale Claim(s) 3, 5 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 3 recites “said measurement time window” but the term lacks antecedent basis in the claims. Claim 1 recites a FT window, but this is not necessarily the same thing as a measurement time window. Claim 5 recites “wide time window” but it is unclear to what degree the window is wide. Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 103 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: PNG media_image3.png 158 934 media_image3.png Greyscale Claim(s) 1-7, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Hager (WO2018142265A1) (US 20210134573 A1 will be used as an English language equivalent) [hereinafter Hager]. Regarding claim 1, Hager teaches a mass spectrometer, comprising: an ion source (see fig 5: 104) for receiving a sample (see 102) and ionizing at least a portion of the sample to generate a plurality of ions (see [0062]), a Fourier Transform (FT) mass analyzer (see [0002], fig 5) configured to receive at least a portion of said plurality of ions at an inlet port thereof (see fig 5), said FT mass analyzer comprising a plurality of rods arranged in a multipole configuration (quadrupole, see claim 1) providing a passageway for transmission of ions from said inlet port to an outlet port through which ions can exit the FT mass analyzer (see fig 5), an RF voltage source (required for intended operation of system, see [0034]) for applying RF voltage(s) to said rods so as to generate an electromagnetic field within said ion passageway for radially confining the ions as they pass through the passageway (see [0033-34]), a voltage source (required for intended operation of system, see [0043]) for applying a voltage pulse to at least one of said rods for radially exciting at least a portion of said ions at secular frequencies thereof (see e.g. [0043,46]) such that an interaction of said radially excited ions with fringing fields in proximity of said outlet port converts said radial oscillations into axial oscillations as the ions exit the FT mass analyzer (see [0047]), an ion detector (see e.g. fig 5: 116) positioned downstream of said FT mass analyzer for detecting said axially oscillating ions and generating a transient oscillating detection signal (see e.g. claim 17), and an analyzer (see e.g. 118) in communication with said ion detector for receiving said transient oscillating detection signal and applying a Fourier Transform to said transient oscillating detection signal to generate a spectrum of secular frequencies of said ions (see [0049]), wherein said analyzer is configured to apply said FT to the transient oscillating ion signal within an FT window (see [0049]) Hagar may fail to explicitly disclose the window is selected to optimize an intensity associated with a secular frequency of a target ion, when said target ion is present in the sample. However, it was well known in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to adjust (i.e. optimize) for an intensity value associated with a desired target ion range (see also Hagar, [0046], discussing adjusting secular frequencies (i.e. frequency range/window) for targeting desired corresponding m/z ratio species). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to adjust for (thereby optimizing some intensity value associated with) some desired target ions, as a routine skill in the art. It has held that discovering an optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Regarding claim 2, Hager teaches wherein said multipole configuration comprises a quadrupole configuration (see Hager, claim 1). Regarding claim 3, Hager teaches wherein said analyzer is configured to determine said measurement time window based on an m/z ratio associated with the target ion (note FT window (vis a vis time ranges limited by FT frequency domain cutoffs) being adjusted based on m/z of desired ion to be analyzed, see generally Hager, [0046]) (alternately note that the actual measurement time as the time required for ions to exit the quadrupole and reach the detector (note [0048]) will naturally be based on the m/z of the ions, in addition to physical parameters like the ion travel distance, and applied ejection voltages. Selection of a time window corresponding to a m/z range traversing the detector, rather than running the detector for an indefinite range, would have been obvious as a routine skill in the art to a skilled artisan at the time the application was effectively filed). Regarding claim 4, the combined teaching of Hager teaches said analyzer is configured to determine said measurement time window based on said determined m/z ratio of the target ion (see discussion regarding claim 3 above). Regarding claim 5, the combined teaching of Hager teaches said analyzer is configured to determine said measurement time window by initially applying an FT with a wide time window (note normal time window may be read as the wide time window) to said transient oscillating detection signal to obtain information regarding secular frequencies of said plurality of ions (secular frequency information is related to m/z information based on e.g. Hager, [0049-52]). Regarding claim 6, the combined teaching of Hager teaches said analyzer is configured to identify a secular frequency associated with a target ion from among said secular frequencies (see identification of individual peaks associated with target ions, in fig 11, [0076]). Regarding claim 7, the combined teaching of Hager teaches said analyzer is configured to determine an m/z ratio of said target ion based on said identified secular frequency (see Hager, fig 11; note determined m/z and secular frequency are based on each other, e.g. [0050-52]). Regarding claim 11, the combined teaching of Hager may fail to explicitly disclose a width of said FT window is in a range of about 0.5 millisecond to about 3 milliseconds. However, Hager teaches the pulse width may be 10 ns to 1 ms (see Hager, e.g. [0044]), and the selection of an FT analysis window commensurate with that range would have been obvious as a routine skill in the art to try to enable the intended operation of the system. Alternately, the pulse width may be read as the FT window under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James Choi whose telephone number is (571) 272 – 2689. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 am – 5:30 pm M-T, and every other Friday. 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, Robert Kim can be reached on (571) 272 – 2293. 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. /JAMES CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592360
MULTI CHARGED PARTICLE BEAM WRITING METHOD AND MULTI CHARGED PARTICLE BEAM WRITING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586749
CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS OF MULTI-BEAM GENERATING AND MULTI-BEAM DEFLECTING UNITS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12555762
Mass Spectrometry Apparatus and Mass Spectrometry Method for Adjusting Ion Accumulation Times Based on Detection Intensity
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12537181
ION TRAP CHIP AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12508332
SANITIZING LIGHT ASSEMBLY AND CONVEYOR SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
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
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+47.1%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 374 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