Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/452,094

OPTICAL SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Aug 18, 2023
Examiner
CHAPEL, DEREK S
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
TDK Taiwan Corp.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
680 granted / 971 resolved
+2.0% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
996
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
41.2%
+1.2% vs TC avg
§102
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
§112
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 971 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Status Of Claims Claims 1-20, received 8/18/2023, are pending for examination. If applicant is aware of any relevant prior art, or other co-pending application not already of record, he/she is reminded of his/her duty under 37 CFR 1.56 to disclose the same. Priority U.S. application 18/452094 filed on 8/18/2023 is the earliest filed application that discloses all of the limitations in claim 1 and therefore is the earliest priority date given for the instant application (i.e. the provisional application 63/399463 filed 8/19/2022 does not disclose the limitations of claim 1). Specification The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 includes the limitation that the optical assembly has “an equivalent focal length to the light” which is unclear since light does not itself have a focal length. Further limitations of claim 1 refer back to “the equivalent focal length” which are also unclear. Therefore, the metes-and-bounds of claim 1 is unclear and therefore claim 1 is indefinite. Claims 2-20 are rejected for inheriting the same indefiniteness of the claims from which they depend. Other Related Art This prior art, made of record, but not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure since the following references have similar structure and/or use similar optical elements to what is claimed and/or disclosed in the instant application: Simmonds, US 2018/0146188 A1, discloses a similar optical system with focusing first and second elements having structure (fig. 8, para. [0047]); Yoon et al., US 10,705,340 B2, discloses a similar optical system with movable first and second elements having at least a first structure (figs. 7A-10); and Weng et al., US 12,181,683 B2, claims a very similar optical system (claim 1). 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. (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) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0050297 A1 (hereafter Chen). The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Chen discloses an optical system (see at least element 100), comprising: a light source used for generating light (see at least element 71, paras. [0051], [0054]); a fixed portion (see at least element(s) 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and/or 16, para. [0038]); an optical assembly having an equivalent focal length to the light and comprising a first optical element (see at least element 31, para. [0042]) and a second optical element (see at least element 32 and/or 33, para. [0042]); and a driving assembly used for driving the second optical element to move relative to the first optical element (see at least element 40, para. [0044]); wherein: when the second optical element is at a first position, the equivalent focal length is a first focal length (see at least paras. [0039]-[0040], [0042]); when the second optical element is at a second position, the equivalent focal length is a second focal length (see at least paras. [0039]-[0040], [0042]); the first focal length and the second focal length are different (see at least paras. [0039]-[0040], [0042]). Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2011/0217029 A1 (hereafter Wu). Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Wu discloses an optical system (see at least figures 1, 3, 4-7), comprising: a light source used for generating light (see at least element 11; It is noted that no limitations are put on the type or position of the light source, and for an image to be formed at the image sensor there must be image light which is inherently produced by some type of light source whether it is the Sun or an artificial light source); a fixed portion (see at least element(s) 22, 221 and/or 222, para. [0026]); an optical assembly having an equivalent focal length to the light and comprising a first optical element (see at least element 311, paras. [0013], [0030]]) and a second optical element (see at least element 21, paras. [0012], [0025]); and a driving assembly used for driving the second optical element to move relative to the first optical element (see at least elements 232, 233, paras. [0012], [0025]-[0027]); wherein: when the second optical element is at a first position, the equivalent focal length is a first focal length (see at least paras. [0012], [0025]-[0027]); when the second optical element is at a second position, the equivalent focal length is a second focal length (see at least paras. [0012], [0025]-[0027]); the first focal length and the second focal length are different (see at least paras. [0012], [0025]-[0027]). Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawamura et al., U.S. Patent Number 8,964,302 B2 (hereafter Kawamura). Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Kawamura discloses an optical system (see at least figures 4A-4C, 6A-6C, 8A-8C), comprising: a light source used for generating light (see at least element 146); a fixed portion (see at least element 140); an optical assembly having an equivalent focal length to the light and comprising a first optical element (see at least figures 4A-4C, 6A-6C, 8A-8C, element G1) and a second optical element (see at least figure 4A-4C, element G4; figure 6A-6C, element G4; and figure 8A-8C, element G5); and a driving assembly used for driving the second optical element to move relative to the first optical element (see at least column 41, lines 8-49; col. 42, line 31 through col. 43, line 5; and col. 43, line 55 through col. 44, line 41); wherein: when the second optical element is at a first position, the equivalent focal length is a first focal length (see at least figure 4A-4C, element G4, column 41, lines 8-49; figure 6A-6C, element G4, col. 42, line 31 through col. 43, line 5; and figure 8A-8C, element G5, col. 43, line 55 through col. 44, line 41); when the second optical element is at a second position, the equivalent focal length is a second focal length (see at least figure 4A-4C, element G4, column 41, lines 8-49; figure 6A-6C, element G4, col. 42, line 31 through col. 43, line 5; and figure 8A-8C, element G5, col. 43, line 55 through col. 44, line 41); the first focal length and the second focal length are different (see at least figure 4A-4C, element G4, column 41, lines 8-49; figure 6A-6C, element G4, col. 42, line 31 through col. 43, line 5; and figure 8A-8C, element G5, col. 43, line 55 through col. 44, line 41). Regarding claim 2, as best understood, Kawamura discloses the limitations of claim 1, and wherein: the first optical element and the second optical element are arranged along a main axis; the driving assembly is used for driving the second optical element to move in directions perpendicular to the main axis (see at least figure 4A-4C, element G4, column 41, lines 8-49; figure 6A-6C, element G4, col. 42, line 31 through col. 43, line 5; and figure 8A-8C, element G5, col. 43, line 55 through col. 44, line 41). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 3 would be objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim if rewritten to overcome the 112(b) objections set forth above, and would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 4-20 depend from claim 3, and therefore would be allowable for at least the same reasons as claim 3. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEREK S. CHAPEL whose telephone number is (571)272-8042. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30am-6pm. 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 B. 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. /Derek S. Chapel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 2/20/2026 Derek S. CHAPEL Primary Examiner Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 18, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596216
Optical Film
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585092
PERISCOPIC CAMERA MODULE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12560795
Microscope System and Corresponding Control System, Method and Computer Program
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12560855
OPTICAL MEMBER DRIVING MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12554133
LIGHTWEIGHT PUPIL REPLICATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
70%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+21.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 971 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