Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/554,613

NANOPATTERN ENCAPSULATION FUNCTION, METHOD AND PROCESS IN COMBINED OPTICAL COMPONENTS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 09, 2023
Examiner
NIGAM, NATASHA
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Magic Leap Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allow Rate
17 granted / 26 resolved
-2.6% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
67
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
47.4%
+7.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
§112
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 26 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/16/2023, 11/14/2023, 04/10/2025, and 07/10/2025 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 10-16 in the reply filed on 01/03/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-9 and 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/03/2026. 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. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first encapsulation layer having a finite radius of curvature must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 10-11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (US 20180206298 A1). Regarding independent claim 10, Chen discloses a display comprising: an illumination layer (Fig. 5; ¶0027) comprising: a substrate (1; Fig. 5; ¶0027); one or more LEDs (3; Fig. 5; ¶0027) disposed on a first surface of the substrate (1) (Fig. 5); and a first encapsulation layer (4, 6; Fig. 5; ¶0027, ¶0036) disposed on the first surface of the substrate (1) (Fig. 5), wherein the first encapsulation layer (4, 6) comprises a patterned surface (61; Fig. 5; ¶0036) such that the patterned surface (61) is configured to improve visible light transmittance of the illumination layer (¶0035-¶0036). Regarding claim 11, Chen discloses the display of claim 10, as set forth above. Chen further discloses the illumination layer (Fig. 2) further comprises a second encapsulation layer (5; Fig. 5; ¶0031) on a second surface of the substrate (1) (Fig. 5), wherein the second encapsulation layer (5) has a second geometry different from a first geometry of the first encapsulation layer (4, 6) (Fig. 5). Regarding claim 15, Chen discloses the display of claim 10, as set forth above. Chen further discloses the one or more LEDs (3) is covered by the first encapsulation layer (4, 6) (Fig. 5; ¶0027). 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. Claim(s) 12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 20180206298 A1) in view of Song et al. (US 20220229298 A1), hereinafter Song. Regarding claim 12, Chen discloses the display of claim 10, as set forth above. Chen does not disclose an eyepiece, the eyepiece configured to present digital content. However, Song teaches a similar display (200; Fig. 2; ¶0003) comprising an LED (242; Fig. 2), further comprising an eyepiece (220, 230; Fig. 2; ¶0055), the eyepiece (220, 230) configured to present digital content (¶0056). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the display of Chen to incorporate the eyepiece of Song for the purpose of performing augmented reality for a user (¶0056 of Song). Regarding claim 16, Chen discloses the display of claim 10, as set forth above. Chen does not disclose a light sensor, the light sensor configured to detect light reflected off an eye of a user, wherein the light is emitted by the one or more LEDs. However, Song teaches a similar display (200; Fig. 2; ¶0003) comprising an LED (242; Fig. 2), further comprising a light sensor (212; Fig. 2; ¶0066), the light sensor (212) configured to detect light reflected off an eye of a user (¶0066), wherein the light is emitted by the one or more LEDs (242) (¶0069). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chen to incorporate the light sensor of Song for the purpose of performing eye tracking (¶0066 of Song). Claim(s) 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 20180206298 A1) in view of Song (US 20220229298 A1) and further in view of Peil et al. (US 20130193592 A1), hereinafter Peil. Regarding claim 13, Chen in view of Song discloses the display of claim 12, as set forth above. Neither Chen nor Song disclose the first encapsulation layer has a finite radius of curvature. However, Peil teaches a similar device comprising an illumination layer (11’; Fig. 4; ¶0147), comprising a substrate (2; Figs. 2, 4; ¶0137), one or more LEDs (4; Figs. 2, 4; ¶0137) disposed on a first surface of the substrate (2) (Figs. 2, 4; ¶0137); and a first encapsulation layer (12; Fig. 4; ¶0147) disposed on the first surface of the substrate (2) (Fig. 4), wherein the first encapsulation layer (12) comprises a patterned surface (15; Fig. 4; ¶0147), and further teaches the first encapsulation layer (12) has a finite radius of curvature (Fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chen in view of Song to incorporate the first encapsulation layer having a finite radius of curvature for the purpose of focusing the light emitted by the LEDs (¶0147 of Peil). Regarding claim 14, Chen in view of Song and further in view of Peil discloses the display of claim 13, including the eyepiece and the radius of curvature, as set forth above. Neither Chen nor Song disclose the radius of curvature is configured to increase an optical power of the eyepiece. However, Peil teaches the radius of curvature is configured to increase an optical power (these lenses have a focusing or dispersing effect on the light emitted by the LEDs; ¶0147). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chen in view of Song to incorporate the first encapsulation layer having a finite radius of curvature for the purpose of focusing the light emitted by the LEDs (¶0147 of Peil). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sharma et al. (US 11455031 B1) discloses an illumination layer comprising a substrate, LEDs, an encapsulation layer, an eyepiece, and a light sensor. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA NIGAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5423. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5. 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, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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. /NATASHA NIGAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 January 14th, 2026 /RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 09, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601934
Removable Eyewear Filter
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596206
ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585082
LENS DRIVING DEVICE, AND CAMERA MODULE AND OPTICAL DEVICE INCLUDING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571627
LASER EMITTER, DEPTH CAMERA AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12554178
OPTICAL SYSTEM AND APPARATUS HAVING THE SAME
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
65%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+23.3%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 26 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