Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/291,428

ROLL-TO-ROLL MECHANIZED EXFOLIATOR AND AUTOMATIC 2D MATERIALS TRANSFER AND LAYERING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jan 23, 2024
Examiner
KONVES, ADRIANNA N
Art Unit
1748
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Brookhaven Science Associates LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 12m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
166 granted / 219 resolved
+10.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 12m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
238
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
51.5%
+11.5% vs TC avg
§102
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
§112
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 219 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on January 30, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 12-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on January 30, 2026. Claim Objections Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: In Claim 10, Line 1, “the substrate” should read “the source material”. In Claim 3, Line 2, “the processing position” should read “the process position”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim 10 is 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. Claim 1, Line 8 recites “a chuck for securing a source substrate contain source material” and Claim 10, Lines 1-2 recites “the stage has a thermal chuck from securing the substrate”. It is unclear whether the limitation in Claim 10 refers to the same chuck or different chucks on the stage. For examination purposes, it will be assumed that “a chuck” in Claim 1 and “a thermal chuck” in Claim 10 are different chucks. 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. (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 1,6-8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tantillo (Automating 2-D Material Exfoliation with Suji Park, cited in IDS). Regarding Claim 1, Tantillo teaches a system for exfoliating a layer of material from a source material (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator) comprising: a first rotary device (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- tape unwinder 1) and a second rotary device (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- tape rewinder 5); the first and second rotary devices each being selectively rotatable in a clockwise and counter clockwise directions (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- see arrows showing rotations of tape unwinder 1 and rewinder 5); a flexible tape having an adhesive surface, the tape extending between the first and second rotary devices (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- PSA tape); a press roller operably connected to a frame and adapted to provide a biasing force in a first direction (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- press roller 3); a stage (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- sample-x stage) having a chuck for securing a source substrate containing source material (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- source material deposition roller), the stage being operably connected to a stage actuator for moving the stage between an initial position (Page 5 Figure- The QPress R2R exfoliation system- showing the source material deposition roller in an inactive position) and a process position (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- showing the source material deposition roller in an active process position); and the tape being disposed between the press roller and the source substrate when stage is in the process position (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator), wherein the press roller applies pressure to the tape and the source material disposed on the source substrate adheres the tape to the source material (Page 5- How does the R2R exfoliator work?- the tape runs over the source material deposition roller), and wherein movement of the stage from the process position to the initial position causes the tape to exfoliate a layer of an exfoliated material from the source material on the source substrate (Page 5 Figure- The QPress R2R exfoliation system and Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- material is only exfoliated when the source material deposition roller is in the active position). Regarding Claim 6, Tantillo further teaches a peeling roller operably connected to the frame, the peeling roller being disposed between the press roller and the second rotary device and in contact with the tape, the peeling roller directing the tape toward the first rotary device (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- peeling angle adjustment roller). Regarding Claim 7, Tantillo further teaches the peeling roller is positionally adjustable to adjust a peeling angle from which the tape is separated from the exfoliated material (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- peeling angle adjustment roller; Page 5- How does the R2R exfoliator work?-the peeling angle can be adjusted). Regarding Claim 8, Tantillo further teaches the stage actuator moves the stage along a first linear axis (Page 5 Figure- The QPress R2R exfoliation system and Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- showing the linear axis the source material deposition roller rotates on). Regarding Claim 10, Tantillo further teaches the stage has a thermal chuck for securing the source material and selectively supplying heat thereto (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- heating plate). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-5, 9, and 11 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 closest prior art to dependent Claim 2 is Tantillo (Automating 2-D Material Exfoliation with Suji Park, cited in IDS) as set forth above. However, the prior art fails to teach or suggest a substrate changer that removes the source substrate from the stage and replaces it on the stage with a target substrate as Tantillo shows two different devices for separately exfoliating the source material and applying the exfoliated material to the sample (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator- showing a separate roller for exfoliation and sample stage for receiving the exfoliated material). Further, there is no teaching or suggestion to modify the device of Tantillo to include a substrate changer that removes the source substrate from the stage and replaces it on the stage with a target substrate. Thus, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed invention. Claims 3-5 and 11 would be allowable by virtue of their dependency on Claim 2. The closest prior art to dependent Claim 9 is Tantillo (Automating 2-D Material Exfoliation with Suji Park, cited in IDS) as set forth above. However, the prior art fails to teach or suggest the stage actuator moves the stage along a second linear axis, the second linear axis being perpendicular to the first linear axis. Examiner notes the source material deposition roller appears to be manually adjustable on a vertical axis (Page 6 Figure- A labeled setup of the R2R exfoliator) but provides no indication of an actuator doing so. Further, there is no teaching or suggestion to modify the device of Tantillo to include the stage actuator moves the stage along a second linear axis, the second linear axis being perpendicular to the first linear axis. Thus, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed invention. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kye et al (PGPub 2008/0236743) teaches an alternative exfoliation device with a vacuum chuck. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Adrianna Konves whose telephone number is (571)272-3958. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00 MST (Arizona). 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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at (571) 270-7457. 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. /A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1748 2/26/26 /Abbas Rashid/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 23, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600685
ENVIRONMENTAL BARRIER COATING AND METHOD OF MAKING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594697
METHOD AND FIXTURE FOR MOLDING A TANK WITH AN EMBEDDED RING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12570425
SLAT EXCHANGE SYSTEM IN THERMO-WELDING MACHINES HAVING CELLS OR ALVEOLAR CAVITIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12552121
Method for integrating a fitting between the wings of a profile
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12534694
A UNIT DOSE CAPSULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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
76%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+13.9%)
2y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 219 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