Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/508,504

Formation Of An Ultrathin Mixed Surface Layer By Ultrashort Pulsed Laser Irradiation Of Alternating Metallic Film Stacks

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Nov 14, 2023
Priority
Nov 14, 2022 — provisional 63/424,981
Examiner
TRAN, THIEN S
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
The Regents of the University of Michigan
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allowance Rate
979 granted / 1366 resolved
+11.7% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
1405
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
86.3%
+46.3% vs TC avg
§102
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
§112
4.4%
-35.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1366 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
CTNF 18/508,504 CTNF 86565 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-12 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, line 4; claim 9, line 4 recites “less than about 2.5 nm”, the term “about” in is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Does “less than about 2.5 nm” mean that a deviation of 5, 10, 15 or 20% from 2.5 nm is acceptable? It is suggested to delete the phrase “about” or define the requisite degree in the claims. Claims 2-8 and 10-12 are also rejected as being dependent upon claims 1 and 9. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Veerasamy (US 2020/0039874) in view of Liu (CN113059269) and Pigeon (US 2021/0121983). With respect to the limitations of claim 1, Veerasamy teaches a method forming an ultrathin mixed surface layer by ultrafast irradiation (0028, ultra-fast laser, 0008, femtosecond lasers) of alternating film stacks (Figs 1, 2, layer 208b, 204b, 208a, 204a, 0052) comprising: providing a stack of alternating layers of a first material (208b, 208a) and a second material (204b, 204a), each layer being less than about 2.5 nm thick (208b, a [1-10 nm]; 204b [5-18 nm]; 204a [2-12 nm]); and irradiating a portion of the stack by directing an ultrafast laser pulse (Fig 1, pump pulse beam 102, 0033; 0037, Lase Mode: Pulsed, with widths no greater than picoseconds, more preferably on the order of 1s, 10s, or 100s of femtosecond) onto a top surface of the stack with a plurality of laser pulses within the stack at or below a melt temperature (0036) of the first material. Veerasamy discloses the claimed invention except for the plurality of laser pulses to form high spatial frequency LIPSS (HSFL) within the stack. However, Liu discloses the plurality of laser pulses to form high spatial frequency LIPSS (HSFL) within the stack (0030-0032, ultrafast laser fabrication of LIPSS, Fig 2a, 0023) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method forming an ultrathin mixed surface layer by ultrafast irradiation of alternating film stacks of Veerasamy silent to forming high spatial frequency LIPSS (HSFL) with the plurality of laser pulses to form high spatial frequency LIPSS (HSFL) within the stack of Liu for the purpose of using femtosecond laser processing technology to prepare micro-nano structures on the surface of semiconductor compound materials that achieves a hydrophilic-to-hydrophobic transformation (0020) suitable for improvement in many areas of application (Pigeon, 0002, the wetting can be modified, which can be of interest in biomedical applications…It is also possible to create surfaces with improved friction properties, for example for sliding skids such as skis, or to limit the wear between parts in contact). With respect to the limitations of claims 4 and 6, Veerasamy teaches the step of providing a stack of alternating layers of a first material and a second material comprises depositing alternating layers of a first material (208b) and a second material (204b) upon a heat sink (Ag layer 204a acts as a heat sink) deposited on a substrate (glass substrate 202, 0052); the step of providing a stack of alternating layers of a first material and a second material comprises providing a stack of alternating layers of a first material (208b, 208a) and a second material (204b, 204a) having a buffer layer interposed within the alternating layers, the buffer layer being thicker than (206b, 0052) each of the alternating layers. With respect to the limitations of claims 2, 3 and 8, Veerasamy teaches the first material is made of Ni (0052, NiCrOx [208b; 208a]; providing a stack of alternating layers of 2.5 nm Ni (0052, 1-10 nm of NiCrOx). Veerasamy in view of Liu and Pigeon discloses the claimed invention except for the second material is made of W; 1.5 nm W films; and the first material has a melt temperature less than the second material. However, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to have the second material is made of W; 1.5 nm W films; and the first material has a melt temperature less than the second material, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable material type involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04). Claims 5 and 7 are also rejected because they are dependent upon claim 1. Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Veerasamy (US 2020/0039874) in view of Zenou (US 2016/0233089). With respect to the limitations of claim 9, Veerasamy teaches a method forming an ultrathin mixed interfacial layer by ultrafast irradiation (0028, ultra-fast laser, 0008, femtosecond lasers) of alternating film stacks (Figs 1, 2, layer 208b, 204b, 208a, 204a, 0052) comprising: providing a stack of alternating layers of a first material (208b, 208a) and a second material (204b, 204a), each layer being less than about 2.5 nm thick (208b, a [1-10 nm]; 204b [5-18 nm]; 204a [2-12 nm]) and deposited on a transparent dielectric substrate (glass 202, 0052); and irradiating a portion of the stack by directing an ultrafast laser pulse (Fig 1, pump pulse beam 102, 0033; 0037, Lase Mode: Pulsed, with widths no greater than picoseconds, more preferably on the order of 1s, 10s, or 100s of femtosecond) onto the top surface of the stack with a plurality of laser pulses to form a mixed layer without forming high spatial frequency LIPSS (HSFL) within the stack (Veerasamy does not disclose forming high spatial frequency LIPSS (HSFL)) at or below a melt temperature (0036) of at least one of the first material and the second material. Veerasamy discloses the claimed invention except for irradiating a portion of the stack by directing a laser pulse through the transparent dielectric substrate onto the top surface of the stack. However, Zenou discloses irradiating a portion of the stack by directing a laser pulse (Fig 5, laser 50, 0092) through the transparent dielectric substrate (donor substrate 60 is transparent to a laser, 0086) onto the top surface of the stack (layers 74, 76, 0092) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the forming method of Veerasamy having a transparent dielectric substrate silent to directing a laser pulse through the transparent dielectric substrate with the irradiating a portion of the stack by directing a laser pulse through the transparent dielectric substrate onto the top surface of the stack of Zenou for the purpose of using a known backside irradiation method that is suitable for melting and intermixing of the alternating stack layers, thereby reducing splatter and debris at the laser processing site. With respect to the limitations of claims 10 and 11, Veerasamy in view of Zenou discloses the irradiating a portion of the stack by directing an ultrafast laser pulse (Veerasamy, Fig 1, pump pulse beam 102, 0033; 0037, Lase Mode: Pulsed, with widths no greater than picoseconds, more preferably on the order of 1s, 10s, or 100s of femtosecond) through the transparent dielectric substrate (Zenou, transparent substrate 60) onto the top surface of the stack (Veerasamy, layer 208b, 204b, 208a, 204a) with a plurality of laser pulses to form a mixed layer without forming high spatial frequency LIPSS (HSFL) within the stack (Veerasamy does not disclose forming high spatial frequency LIPSS (HSFL)) is performed at or below a melt temperature of both the first material and the second material (0036); the mixed layer extends through both the first material and the second material (Zenou, see figures 5A-5C). With respect to the limitations of claim 12, Veerasamy in view of Zenou discloses the claimed invention except for the mixed layer extends to 28 nm to 32 nm. However, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to have the mixed layer extends to 28 nm to 32 nm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable mixed layer depth involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04). Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 5 and 7 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 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THIEN S TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday [8:00-4:00]. 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, Steven Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5095. 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. /THIEN S TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 6/15/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/508,504 Page 2 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/508,504 Page 3 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/508,504 Page 4 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/508,504 Page 5 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/508,504 Page 6 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/508,504 Page 7 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/508,504 Page 8 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/508,504 Page 9 Art Unit: 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 14, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 31, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12678894
Method for Welding an Attachment Piece to a Semiconductor Metallisation by Laser Welding
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12673384
LASER PROCESSOR, LASER PROCESSING SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR MOUNTING CARTRIDGE
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12667219
COOKING VESSEL
4y 4m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12667222
DC COOKING APPLIANCE
1y 3m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12661712
METHOD FOR THE ADDITIVE MANUFACTURE OF A TURBOMACHINE COMPONENT
4y 4m to grant Granted Jun 23, 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
72%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+24.1%)
3y 3m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1366 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