Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/391,600

PANEL LIGHT GUIDE MODULE OF SOLID-STATE DRIVE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 20, 2023
Examiner
KIANNI, KAVEH C
Art Unit
2874
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Aic Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
1070 granted / 1231 resolved
+18.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
1256
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
60.4%
+20.4% vs TC avg
§102
13.4%
-26.6% vs TC avg
§112
25.3%
-14.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1231 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Detailed Action 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, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 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 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. Claims1-6 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over “Haddick”; John D. et al, US 20130127980 A1. . Regarding claim 1, Haddick teaches a panel light guide module (see figs. 1-4, 15, 83-84 summary) for a solid-state drive (see at least parag. 0031 and 1213), guiding a light emitted from a plurality of light sources positioned on a plurality of installation surfaces (see at least figs. 84, 191-194), the panel light guide module (Figs. 1-209) comprising: PNG media_image1.png 254 765 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 357 441 media_image2.png Greyscale a panel shell (see figs. 1-4, 83-84; item i.e., 102, 8504) comprising a housing (i.e. 300), and a panel (see figs. 2, 84) combined to the housing (see at least fig. 1-3, 83-84), the panel comprising at least one light source hole (see at least fig 84, item 8412, or item 210 inserted/position there as item “light source hole” for light/image output); and a light guide structure (shown in at least figs. 1-3, and 84), comprising a light guide cover (i. e., external cover of the projector 108/200 shown combined with the housing 202 and at least one light guide column 220 positioned on the light guide cover, the light guide column 220 comprising a light-receiving surface facing the light sources RGB-LED and a light-emitting surface facing the light source hole (shown in at least fig. 2); wherein, the light sources comprise a plurality of luminous surfaces (i.e., see at least the pbs/beam slitters of fig. 2 with fig. 98b also fig. 4), and the light-receiving surface (i.e., surface of display 210 faces the luminous surfaces of the light sources and receives the light emitted from the light sources RGB_LEDs (see at least figs. 1-2, para. 0285). However, Haddick does not teach all limitations of the claim such as luminous surfaces in embodiment of figs. 1-2, rather in other embodiments such as figs. 98 or 4. Nonetheless, all embodiments of Haddick are closely interrelated and thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention made to embodiment of figs. 1-2 using another related embodiment so as to produce a light guide module for solid state hard drive (parag. 0931). The arguments presented in in rejection of claim 1, including the obviousness and motivation are incorporated in rejection of the following claims as follows: 2. The panel light guide module according to claim 1, wherein the light guide cover comprises a plurality of positioning structures, and the light guide column is fixed on the positioning structures (shown in at least fig. 1 and 21-22). 3. The panel light guide module according to claim 2, wherein the positioning structures comprises a plurality of positioning holes defined thereon, the light guide column comprises a plurality of positioning posts, and the positioning posts are inserted in the positioning holes (shown in at least figs. 21-22). . 4. The panel light guide module according to claim 3, wherein the plurality of positioning structures comprises a plurality of positioning ribs (i.,e, 2126) surrounding two sides of each of the positioning holes, and the light guide column is inserted between two of the positioning ribs (see fat least ig. 21). 5. The panel light guide module according to claim 1, wherein the light guide structure further comprises at least one light-transmitting piece 210/216 , one side of the light-transmitting piece is exposed from the light source hole, and another side of the light-transmitting piece is located adjacent to the light-emitting surface of the light guide column (shown in at least fig. 1 and 21-22). . 6. The panel light guide module according to claim 5, wherein an amount of the light source hole, an amount of the light guide column and an amount of the light-transmitting piece respectively are multiple (see figs. 21-22 with at least two projectors). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7-12 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. Citation of Relevant Prior Art Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. In accordance with MPEP 707.05 the following references are pertinent in rejection of this application since they provide substantially the same information disclosure as this patent does. These references are: US 20130278631 A1 US 20130328785 A1 US 9465000 B1 US 20200090884 A1 US 20130329450 A1 US 20130328741 A1 US 20200328050 A1 US 20130127980 A1 US 20190150749 A1 US 20230066741 A1 US 20130328780 A1 US 20170060176 A1 JP 2020108695 A US 11592862 B1 US 20110128718 A1 US 20110176289 A1 US 20250004296 A1 JP 2025081151 A US 20140091209 A1 US 20260027736 A1 Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAVEH C KIANNI whose telephone number is (571)272-2417. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-19. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Hollweg can be reached on571-270-1739. 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. /KAVEH C KIANNI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 20, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601881
OPTICAL FIBER CONNECTOR WITH IMPROVED FIXING PLATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596233
FIBER OPTIC ADAPTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585069
OPTICAL CONNECTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585070
MULTI-GANG ADAPTER FOR HIGH-DENSITY ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578527
RECONFIGURABLE OPTICAL INTERCONNECTS FOR CO-PACKAGED DEVICES INCLUDING PHOTONIC INTEGRATED CIRCUITS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
87%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+11.2%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1231 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