Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/379,971

OPTICAL AMPLIFIER AND OPTICAL AMPLIFICATION METHOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 13, 2023
Priority
Oct 31, 2022 — JP 2022-173986
Examiner
ST CYR, DANIEL
Art Unit
2876
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
NEC Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
1135 granted / 1394 resolved
+13.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1435
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
43.2%
+3.2% vs TC avg
§102
31.9%
-8.1% vs TC avg
§112
3.1%
-36.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1394 resolved cases

Office Action

§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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim (s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Le et al, WO2017183061 . Regarding claims 1, 11, and 15, Le et al disclose an optical amplifier and a method for amplifying optical signal s comprising: a first rare-earth-doped fiber 382; a second rare-earth-doped fiber 386 connected in series with the first rare-earth-doped fiber; excitation light combining means 384, 381 for inputting core excitation light 341-34(n) to any of a core of the first rare-earth-doped fiber and a core of the second rare- earth-doped fiber and inputting clad excitation light 340 to a clad of the first rare-earth-doped fiber 382, the clad excitation light ha v ing a wave length different from that of the care excitation light , and an optical filter arranged between the first rare-earth- doped fiber 382 and the second rare-earth-doped fiber 386 and configured to transmit the wavelength multiplexing optical signal and the c o re excitation light and block the clad excitation light (paragraph [0065]). (figures 2 and 4; paragraphs [0064)- [0069]): Le et al fail to explicitly disclose that the clad excitation light having a wavelength different from that of the core excitation light and the optical filter being configured to transmit the core excitation light. However, Le et al show in the second exemplary embodiment in conjunction with figure 2 an amplifier wherein core and clad excitation lights have wavelengths 1480 nm and 980 nm respectively and would regard it as obvious to adopt the same excitation light sources for the amplifier of the fourth exemplary embodiment illustrated in figure 4. Similarly, in seeking to implement a stripper integrated in the first gain medium 382, the skilled person would adopt the stripper 183 of the second exemplary embodiment and so would arrive at the feature an optical filter arranged between the first rare-earth-doped fiber and the second rare-earth-doped fiber and configured to transmit the wavelength multiplexing optical signal and the core excitation light and block the clad excitation light without resort to an inventive activity. Regarding claims 2-6 , 12, and 16 , t he se features are known from Le et al (paragraphs [0064]-[0069]). Regarding claim 7, the features are shown in Le et al (paragraph [0057]). Regarding claim 8-10, 13-14, and 17, these features are shown in Le et al (paragraphs [0049]-[0051]), which teaches means for minimizing a difference in output level between different WDM channel signals. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tench et al, US Pub. 2022/0021173, disclose an efficient in-band pumping of holmium-doped optical fiber amplifiers. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT DANIEL ST CYR whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-2407 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M to F 8:00-8:00 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Michael G Lee can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-2398 . 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. FILLIN "Examiner Stamp" \* MERGEFORMAT DANIEL ST CYR Primary Examiner Art Unit 2876 /DANIEL ST CYR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 13, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12613376
OPTICAL ISOLATORS FOR MULTI-CHANNEL OPTICAL INTERCONNECTS
2y 10m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12613080
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ACCURACY ASSISTANCE CALCULATION AND DISPLAY ON REMOVABLE DEVICE
2y 0m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12608572
ASSET VERIFICATION SYSTEM AND METHODS OF USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12608579
DUAL INTERFACE LAMINATED CARD AND CORRESPONDING METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING A DUAL INTERFACE LAMINATED CARD
1y 7m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12595620
SYSTEM FOR INDEXING AND ORIENTING GARMENTS
2y 10m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
81%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+13.1%)
2y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1394 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