Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/332,920

LASER PROCESSING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 12, 2023
Priority
Jun 23, 2022 — JP 2022-101243
Examiner
WIBLIN, MATTHEW
Art Unit
3745
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
DISCO Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allowance Rate
489 granted / 655 resolved
+4.7% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
695
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
41.7%
+1.7% vs TC avg
§102
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
§112
32.8%
-7.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 655 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 . 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)(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. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Morikazu; Hiroshi US 20080179302 A1, hereinafter Morikazu. Regarding claim 1, Morikazu discloses (Fig. 1-8) a laser processing apparatus comprising: a chuck table (31) having a holding surface that holds a workpiece (2) and is defined by an X-axis direction and a Y-axis direction [0027] (Fig. 2); and a laser beam irradiation unit (32) that irradiates the workpiece held by the chuck table with a laser beam (LB), wherein the laser beam irradiation unit includes a laser oscillator (4) that emits the laser beam [0030], an fθ lens (62) that focuses the laser beam emitted by the laser oscillator on the workpiece held by the chuck table [0031], an X-axis optical scanner (71) that is disposed between the laser oscillator and the fθ lens, and induces the laser beam emitted by the laser oscillator in the X-axis direction [0033], a Y-axis optical scanner (72) that is disposed between the laser oscillator and the fθ lens, and induces the laser beam emitted by the laser oscillator in the Y-axis direction [0034], and a controller (“control means”, [0033-0034], wherein the controller includes a spot shape (S) storing section that stores a shape of a spot of the laser beam with which the workpiece held by the chuck table is irradiated ([0048] describes the “control means” knowledge/storage of the spot shape (S)), and a processing shape (B, “via hole” [0044]) storing section that stores X-coordinates and Y-coordinates on a processing shape to be formed in the workpiece held by the chuck table ([0041-0044] describe developing/coordinating the via hole with the workpiece’s orientation with respect to x/y-coordinates, [0050] describes knowledge/storage of the (B) via hole shape), and, when the workpiece held by the chuck table is irradiated with the laser beam, the controller controls the X-axis optical scanner and the Y-axis optical scanner on a basis of the shape of the spot and the X-coordinates and Y-coordinates on the processing shape , and irradiation with the laser beam is executed in such a manner that a contour of the shape of the spot is positioned to an X-coordinate and Y-coordinate on the processing shape, and that a tangent line to the spot and a tangent line to the processing shape at the X-coordinate and Y-coordinate correspond with each other ([0051-0055] disclose controlling (32/71/72) such that the spot shape irradiation forms the processing shape thereby coordinating the shapes). 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 of this title, 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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morikazu in view of O'Brien, James N. et al. US 20020190435 A1, hereinafter O’Brien. The references is/are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because the references is/are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (laser obliteration of semiconductor wafers); or the references is/are reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (shapes of laser obliteration). MPEP2141.01(a) I. Regarding claim 2, Morikazu discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1. Morikazu further discloses (Fig. 1-8) the spot is positioned to an inside of the processing shape when the inside of the processing shape is deemed as unnecessary (Fig. 6-8, [0051-0055]). Morikazu fails to explicitly state that the spot is positioned to an outside of the processing shape when the outside of the processing shape is deemed as unnecessary. O’Brien discloses (Fig. 3-5 & 19) a laser processing apparatus comprising: a chuck table (100) having a holding surface that holds a workpiece (12) and is defined by an X-axis direction and a Y-axis direction [0061] (Fig. 3); and a laser beam irradiation unit that irradiates the workpiece held by the chuck table with a laser beam (32), wherein the laser beam irradiation unit includes a laser oscillator (14) that emits the laser beam [0040], an fθ lens (58) that focuses the laser beam emitted by the laser oscillator on the workpiece held by the chuck table [0048], an X-axis optical scanner (60) that is disposed between the laser oscillator and the fθ lens, and induces the laser beam emitted by the laser oscillator in the X-axis direction [0044], a Y-axis optical scanner (60) that is disposed between the laser oscillator and the fθ lens, and induces the laser beam emitted by the laser oscillator in the Y-axis direction [0044], and a controller (70, [0052]) , wherein the controller includes a spot shape (“dspot” (Fig. 11)) storing section that stores a shape of a spot of the laser beam with which the workpiece held by the chuck table is irradiated ([0015]), a processing shape (162) storing section that stores X-coordinates and Y-coordinates on a processing shape to be formed in the workpiece held by the chuck table [0094], wherein the spot is positioned to an outside of the processing shape when the outside of the processing shape is deemed as unnecessary for the purpose of producing microelectronic machine system devices [0094]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to modify Morikazu, by positioning the spot to an outside of the processing shape, as taught by O’Brien, for the purpose of producing microelectronic machine system devices. Relevant Art The following is a listing of relevant art: US 20080031291 A1, US 20060201920 A1, US 20090039061 A1, US 4392476 A, US 7531767 B2, US 7675002 B2, US 5841099 A, US 8487208 B2 disclose laser processing apparatuses similar to the claimed invention. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW WIBLIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9836. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NATHANIEL WIEHE can be reached on 571-272-8648. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MATTHEW WIBLIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 12, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12747559
Electric Working Machine
1y 2m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12735863
CONSTRUCTION MACHINE
1y 3m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12728831
FLUID PRESSURE SUPPLY APPARATUS
1y 10m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12729701
HYDRAULIC SYSTEM WITH COOLING CIRCUIT AND MACHINE TOOL
1y 3m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12722687
A REDUNDANT HYDRAULIC SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 01, 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
75%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+23.4%)
2y 6m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 655 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