Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/289,237

OPTICAL FINGERPRINT SENSOR COMPRISING A DIFFRACTIVE ELEMENT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 02, 2023
Examiner
MERLIN, JESSICA M
Art Unit
2871
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Fingerprint Cards Anacatum Ip AB
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
714 granted / 1158 resolved
-6.3% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
1213
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
61.8%
+21.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.6%
-18.4% vs TC avg
§112
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1158 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 . 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-5, 8, 9, and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chou et al. (US 2021/0271851 A1). In regard to claim 1, Chou et al. discloses an optical fingerprint sensor 13 (denoted “spectrum detecting unit”, paragraph [0056]) configured to be arranged under an at least partially transparent display panel 50 (see e.g. paragraph [0056] and note that the light traverses 50, thus it must be at least partially transparent) and configured to capture an image of the object F (denoted “finger”, see e.g. paragraph [0056]) located on an opposite side of the at least partly transparent display panel 50, the optical fingerprint sensor 13 comprising (see e.g. Figures 11-13, 15): an image sensor 10 (denoted “fingerprint sensing array”, see e.g. paragraph [0056]), comprising photodetector pixel array (i.e. comprising elements 12) configured to detect light for performing fingerprint detection (see e.g. paragraph [0056]); a lens system 20 (denoted “optical unit”, see e.g. paragraph [0057], [0061]) arranged to focus light transmitted from an object F onto the photodetector pixel array 10; and a diffractive element 12a, 12b, 12c (denoted “heterogenous spectrum separating cells”, paragraph [0061] and paragraph [0067] for diffraction grating), configured to spatially distribute spectral components of the light transmitted from the object and focused onto the photodetector pixel array (see e.g. paragraph [0060]), wherein the diffractive element 12a, 12b, 12c is arranged spatially separated from the image sensor by a distance sufficient for the spectral components to be spatially spread onto different subsets of photodetectors 12 of the image sensor 10 (see e.g. Figures 12 and 13 for spatial separation), wherein the diffractive element 12a, 12b, 12c is arranged on a substrate (i.e. on 35 in Figure 12 or on 20 in Figure 13) for wafer level optics integrated with a wafer level optic lens of the lens system (see e.g. Figures 12 and 13 and note it is directly or indirectly integrated with the lens system). In regard to claim 2, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and the diffractive element being adapted to provide a spatial distribution of the spectral components that is different from fingerprint structure frequencies (see e.g. paragraph [0037] where it is noted that 12a-c have narrow spectrums of three primary colors). In regard to claim 3, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and wherein the diffractive element 12a-c comprises at least one slit, or a grating, or a variation in refractive index, for separating the light into the spectral components (see e.g. paragraph [0067] for diffraction grating). In regard to claim 4, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and configured to use information in the spectral components for spoof detection (see e.g. paragraph [0063] where it is noted that the system may judge the finger as real). In regard to claim 5, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and wherein the diffractive element 12a-c is integrated in the lens system 20 (see e.g. Figure 13). In regard to claim 8, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and wherein the diffractive element 12a-c is arranged over the lens system 20, with the lens system 20 interleaved between the diffractive element 12a-c and the image sensor 10 (see e.g. Figure 13). In regard to claim 9, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and wherein the diffractive element 12a-c is arranged under the lens system 20 (see e.g. Figure 12). In regard to claim 12, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and wherein the diffractive element 12a-c is configured to distribute the spectral components in a linear pattern along one axis of the image sensor (see e.g. Figure 18 and paragraph [0070]). In regard to claim 13, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and wherein the diffractive element 12a,b,c is configured to separate spectral components of the light transmitted from the object and focused onto the pixel matrix, such that the spectral components are distributed across the entire photodetector pixel array 12 (see e.g. Figure 16, paragraph [0068]). In regard to claim 14, Chou et al. discloses an electronic device comprising (see e.g. paragraph [0034] for mobile phone): an at least partly transparent display panel 50 (see e.g. paragraph [0056] and note that the light traverses 50, thus it must be at least partially transparent); the optical fingerprint sensor according to claim 1 (see e.g. rejection of claim 1), and processing circuitry 30 (denoted “signal processing unit”) configured to: receive a signal from the optical fingerprint sensor indicative of a fingerprint of a finger touching the at least partly transparent display panel (see e.g. paragraph [0063]), perform a fingerprint authentication procedure based on information comprised in the signal (see e.g. paragraph [0063]). In regard to claim 15, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 14 above, and wherein the electronic device is a mobile device (see e.g. paragraph [0034] for mobile phone). In regard to claim 16, Chou et al. discloses a method for manufacturing a lens comprising a diffractive element, the method comprising: forming a grating 12a-d or at least one slit in a transparent substrate 35, wherein the transparent substrate is a glass substrate or a polymer-based substrate for wafer level optics (see e.g. Figure 12, paragraph [0065] and paragraph [0067] for diffraction grating); forming a lens structure 20 using wafer level optics technology on the transparent substrate such that the lens structure 20 covers the grating 12a-d or the at least one slit (see e.g. Figure 12 and note that optical system 12, comprising lenses covers the grating 12a-d). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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: 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. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 2021/0271851 A1) in view of Gal et al. (US 5,600,486). In regard to claim 6, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 5 above, but fails to disclose wherein the diffractive element is arranged on the surface of a lens in the lens system. However, Gal et al. discloses (see e.g. Figures 1-2): wherein the diffractive element is arranged on the surface of a lens in the lens system (see e.g. Column 6, line 57-Column 7 line 3). Given the teachings of Gal et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chou et al. with wherein the diffractive element is arranged on the surface of a lens in the lens system. Integrating the diffractive element with the lens will allow for a spatial separation of the color. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 2021/0271851 A1) in view of Mackey et al. (US 2017/0286742 A1). In regard to claim 7, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 5 above, but fails to disclose wherein the lens system comprises at least one Fresnel lens comprising grooves that constitute the at least one diffractive element. However, Mackey et al. discloses (see e.g. paragraphs [0045], [0067] and Figures 4 and 11): wherein the lens system 204 comprises at least one Fresnel lens comprising grooves that constitute the at least one diffractive element (see e.g. paragraph [0045]). Given the teachings of Mackey et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chou et al. with wherein the lens system comprises at least one Fresnel lens comprising grooves that constitute the at least one diffractive element. Doing so would provide a lens/diffraction structure that may be made thing, lightweight and compact in design. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 2021/0271851 A1) in view of He et al. (US 2019/0303639 A1). In regard to claim 10, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, but fails to disclose wherein the diffractive element is arranged on the surface of an infra-red cut off filter of the lens system. However, He et al. discloses the use of an infra-red cut off filter in a fingerprint sensing system (see e.g. paragraph [0302]). Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that combining Chou et al. would result in wherein the diffractive element is arranged on the surface of an infra-red cut off filter of the lens system where it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use said configuration, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Given the teachings of He et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chou et al. with wherein the diffractive element is arranged on the surface of an infra-red cut off filter of the lens system. Providing an IR cut filter would block undesired background light while allowing illumination light for fingerprint sensing (see e.g. paragraph [0302] of He et al.). Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 2021/0271851 A1). In regard to claim 11, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, but fails to disclose wherein the diffractive element is configured to distribute the spectral components in a circular pattern. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use a configuration in which the spectral components are distributed in a circular pattern, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.04, in re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chou et al. with wherein the diffractive element is configured to distribute the spectral components in a circular pattern. Providing a particular pattern of circular components would depend on the shape and configuration of the lens and diffraction elements, as is known in the art, where a change in the shape of those element resulting in a specific spectral patter would be within ordinary skill. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 2021/0271851 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 2015/0049047 A1). In regard to claim 17, Chou et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 16 above, but fails to disclose wherein the grating or slit is manufactured using lithography. However, Liu et al. discloses wherein the grating or slit is manufactured using lithography (see e.g. paragraphs [0056], [0063]). Given the teachings of Liu et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chou et al. with wherein the grating or slit is manufactured using lithography. Doing so would provide a common and inexpensive method for producing grating structures. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA M MERLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3207. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00AM-5:00PM. 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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at (571) 272-9791. 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. /JESSICA M MERLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 02, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12585057
A LIGHT DIFFUSER AND A METHOD FOR ASSEMBLING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12572039
LIGHT MODULATION DEVICE AND PROJECTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560794
MICROSCOPIC OBSERVATION METHOD AND MICROSCOPIC OBSERVATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12560838
DISPLAY DEVICE AND VEHICLE-USE DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12554131
HEAD-UP DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
62%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+23.6%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1158 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