Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/300,087

GLASS ELEMENT WITH STRUCTURED WALL AND METHOD FOR THE PRODUCTION THEREOF

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Apr 13, 2023
Priority
Oct 13, 2020 — DE 10 2020 126 856.4 +2 more
Examiner
SAMPLE, DAVID R
Art Unit
1784
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Schott AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
514 granted / 645 resolved
+14.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
673
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
61.1%
+21.1% vs TC avg
§102
12.5%
-27.5% vs TC avg
§112
7.9%
-32.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 645 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 of Group I, claims 1-15, in the reply filed on 10 February 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Non-elected claims 16-20 have been canceled. Claim Objections Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 15, line 2, “os” should be -- is --. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ortner et al. (US 2018/0215647 A1)(Ortner). Ortner discloses a plate-like glass (i.e., panel). See the title. Glass is inherently a “vitreous material.” Ortner discloses employing a glass having a coefficient of thermal expansion of 3.3 x 10-6K-1. See paragraph [0080]. The plate has opposing surfaces, a thickness between the surfaces and a channel (i.e., recess) which joins the surfaces. See the abstract and Figure 12. The wall of the channel between the surfaces has a plurality of hemispherical depressions (i.e., dome-shaped hollows). See the abstract. Hemispherical depressions have ridges that enclose them as shown in Figure 7. Ortner fails to disclose: The mean roughness of the wall of the channel is least 50 nm and less than 5 µm (claim 1); The mean roughness value is at least 50 nm and less than 1 µm (claim 5) and The anisotropy limitations of instant claims 12 and 13. However, these features are presumed to be inherent to the article of Ortner for two reasons. See MPEP 2112. First, the SEM micrograph of Figure 7 of Ortner is identical to instant Figure 5. Instant Figure 5 shows the surface of the channel and is formed in accordance with the instant invention. See paragraph [0079] of the instant specification as published as US 2023/0311248 A1. If the surface of Ortner is microscopically identical to the surface of the present invention, the mean roughness and anisotropy must also be the same. Second, the method taught by Ortner and the method of the instant invention are nearly identical: Step/parameter Ortner disclosure Location in Ortner Instant invention Location in Pre Grant publication of the instant invention Laser YAG; 1064 nm [0053] Nd:YAG 1064 nm [0039] Laser dia. 12 mm [0053] 12 mm [0039] Laser pulse duration 10 ps [0053] < 15 ps [0044] Number of pulses 4 or more [0053] 3 to less than 10 [0041] Burst frequency 20 ns [0053] 20 ns [0070] Pulse energy At least 400 microjoule [0053] At least 400 microjoule [0070] Etchant KOH [0054] KOH [0073] Etchant concentration 6-30mol/L [0054] 6-30 mol/L [0073] Etching pH > 12 [0054] > 12 [0073] Etching temperature > 90°C [0054] 60-100°C [0051] Etching time 8 hours [0081] Several hours [0052] If the surface of the channel is formed in an identical manner, then the wall mean surface roughness and anisotropy must be the same. As to claims 2 and 3, Ortner teaches the channel runs transverse, in particular perpendicular, to the side face. See paragraph [0072]. As to claim 6, Ortner teaches the hemispherical depressions (i.e., domes) have a transverse dimension (i.e., diameter) of 5 to 20 µm. See paragraph [0074]. As to claims 7 and 8, Ortner discloses forming multiple channels in which each is formed by the same method and will therefore have the claimed mean roughness. See Figures 3-6. The transmission recited in claims 9 and 10 is presumed to be inherent to the product of Ortner because it is formed in an identical manner with a glass that is identical to the glass recited in instant claim 14. As to claim 14, Ortner discloses using a glass containing 63-83wt% SiO2. See paragraph [0080] As to claim 15, Ortner teaches the glass may be used as a fuel pressure sensor. See paragraph [0091]. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David Sample whose telephone number is (571)272-1376. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7AM to 3:30 PM. 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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-0604. 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. /David Sample/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 13, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12637386
DEADFRONT FOR DISPLAYS INCLUDING A TOUCH PANEL ON DECORATIVE GLASS AND RELATED METHODS
2y 0m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12623292
COATED TOOL
3y 9m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12624229
ENVIRONMENTAL BARRIER COATING WITH THERMAL RESISTANCE
3y 5m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12623968
FUNCTIONALLY GRADED FIRING SETTERS AND PROCESS FOR MANUFACTURING THESE SETTERS
3y 5m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12617695
FLUORITE-BASED MATERIAL THIN FILM AND SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE COMPRISING THE SAME
4y 6m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+9.9%)
2y 9m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 645 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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