Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/338,567

Lightweight Night Vision Systems Using Broadband Diffractive Optics

Final Rejection §101
Filed
Jun 21, 2023
Examiner
LAVARIAS, ARNEL C
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
The United States Of America AS Represented By The Director Of The National Geospatial-Intelligence
OA Round
2 (Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
667 granted / 838 resolved
+11.6% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-0.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
11 currently pending
Career history
851
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
56.4%
+16.4% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 838 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 . Drawings The originally filed drawings were received on 6/21/2023. These drawings are acceptable. Terminal Disclaimer The terminal disclaimer filed on 2/20/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of any patent granted on Application Number 18/338651 has been reviewed and is NOT accepted. The Office cannot process the remarks filed on February 20, 2026 as a terminal disclaimer because terminal disclaimer processing is handled by a different business unit and not by the examiner or technology center. The terminal disclaimer (TD) needs to be filed as a separate paper. See 37 CFR 1.4(c). The Office recommends that applicant use form PTO/AIA /25, which is a form for a TD to obviate nonstatutory double patenting over a reference application. Please note that the TD must have the proper language, be made by the applicant of record, which is The United States of America As Represented By The Director Of The National Geospatial-Intelligence as indicated on the filing receipt, and must be signed by the applicant or attorney of record. It is noted that there is no attorney of record in the application file and a TD fee was not paid. It is also noted that National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency is not the applicant of record. Response to Amendment The amendments to Claims 1-3, 13, 15 in the submission filed 2/20/2026 are acknowledged and accepted. The amendments to the specification of the disclosure in the submission filed 2/20/2026 are acknowledged and accepted. The amendments to Claims 1, 4, 19 in the submission filed 3/25/2026 are acknowledged and accepted. Response to Arguments The Applicant’s arguments, see in particular Page 1 of the remarks, filed 2/20/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections in Section 9 of the Office Action dated 10/23/2025, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections in Section 9 of the Office Action dated 10/23/2025 have been withdrawn. In view of the amendments made to the claims above, the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejections in Section 14 of the Office Action dated 10/23/2025 are respectfully withdrawn. Claim 1 is now rejected as follows. Priority It is noted that Applicant’s petition under 37 CFR 1.78(e), filed 2/20/2026, was recently dismissed. Please review the Office Action dated 5/4/2026. This application makes reference to or appears to claim subject matter disclosed in Application No. 17/166186, filed 2/3/2021. If applicant desires to claim the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121, 365(c) or 386(c), the instant application must contain, or be amended to contain, a specific reference to the prior-filed application in compliance with 37 CFR 1.78. If the application was filed before September 16, 2012, the specific reference must be included in the first sentence(s) of the specification following the title or in an application data sheet (ADS) in compliance with pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.76; if the application was filed on or after September 16, 2012, the specific reference must be included in an ADS in compliance with 37 CFR 1.76. For benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c), the reference must include the relationship (i.e., continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part) of the applications. If the instant application is a utility or plant application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a), the specific reference must be submitted during the pendency of the application and within the later of four months from the actual filing date of the application or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. If the application is a national stage application under 35 U.S.C. 371, the specific reference must be submitted during the pendency of the application and within the later of four months from the date on which the national stage commenced under 35 U.S.C. 371(b) or (f), four months from the date of the initial submission under 35 U.S.C. 371 to enter the national stage, or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. See 37 CFR 1.78(a)(4) for benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78(d)(3) for benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c). This time period is not extendable and a failure to submit the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and/or 120, where applicable, within this time period is considered a waiver of any benefit of such prior application(s) under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121, 365(c), and 386(c). A benefit claim filed after the required time period may be accepted if it is accompanied by a grantable petition to accept an unintentionally delayed benefit claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) (see 37 CFR 1.78(c)) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) (see 37 CFR 1.78(e)). The petition must be accompanied by (1) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 or 119(e) and by 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior application (unless previously submitted), (2) the applicable petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(m)(1) or (2), and (3) a statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78 and the date the claim was filed was unintentional. The presentation of a benefit claim may result in an additional fee under 37 CFR 1.17(w)(1) or (2) being required, if the earliest filing date for which benefit is claimed under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) and 1.78(d) in the application is more than six years before the actual filing date of the application. The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional. The petition should be addressed to: Mail Stop Petition, Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450. If the reference to the prior application was previously submitted within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78 but was not included in the location in the application required by the rule (e.g., if the reference was submitted in an oath or declaration or the application transmittal letter), and the information concerning the benefit claim was recognized by the Office as shown by its inclusion on the first filing receipt, the petition under 37 CFR 1.78 and the petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(m)(1) or (2) are not required. Applicant is still required to submit the reference in compliance with 37 CFR 1.78 by filing an ADS in compliance with 37 CFR 1.76 with the reference (or, if the application was filed before September 16, 2012, by filing either an amendment to the first sentence(s) of the specification or an ADS in compliance with pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.76). See MPEP § 211.02. Double Patenting A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claim 1 is provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of Claims 1, 4 of copending Application No. 18/338651 (See U.S. Patent Application Publication US 2024/0427064 A1) (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-20 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. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARNEL C LAVARIAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2315. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:30 AM-7 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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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. ARNEL C. LAVARIAS Primary Examiner Group Art Unit 2872 5/11/2026 /ARNEL C LAVARIAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 21, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 12, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101
Feb 26, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 13, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 13, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 13, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12631812
MULTILAYER OPITICAL FILM
2y 8m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12631811
POLARIZING PLATE AND OPTICAL DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 2m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12625356
PROGRAMMABLE MULTIPLE-POINT ILLUMINATOR, CONFOCAL FILTER, CONFOCAL MICROSCOPE AND METHOD TO OPERATE SAID CONFOCAL MICROSCOPE
2y 5m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12619058
HIGH-THROUGHPUT SPATIAL IMAGING SYSTEM FOR BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES
2y 9m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12613399
OPTICAL SYSTEM FOR REDUCING DISTURBING OPTICAL EFFECTS AND FOR CORRECTING VISON DEFECTS
3y 2m to grant Granted Apr 28, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (-0.7%)
2y 10m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 838 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