Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/571,056

AN ASSEMBLY FOR PRESSING AGAINST EACH OTHER TWO OPHTHALMIC LENSES IN ORDER TO BUILD AN ELECTROCHROMIC CELL

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 15, 2023
Examiner
MOSER, SETH DAVID
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Essilor International
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allow Rate
38 granted / 38 resolved
+32.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
48
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
44.0%
+4.0% vs TC avg
§102
34.6%
-5.4% vs TC avg
§112
21.4%
-18.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 38 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 . 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. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180196283 A1 (Ballet et al.) in view of US 20200311661 A1 (Stein). Regarding claim 1: Ballet discloses an assembly comprising: a first ophthalmic lens having a first internal face and a first external face; (See fig. 7, ophthalmic lens [4]) a second ophthalmic lens having a second internal face and a second external face, said second ophthalmic lens being superposed on said first ophthalmic lens; (See fig. 7, second ophthalmic lens [5] is superposed on first lens [4]) a pressing device, adapted to contact one of said first and second ophthalmic lenses in a contact area and to press said first and second ophthalmic lenses against each other in order (See fig. 7, Pressing device [18] presses first and second ophthalmic lenses [4] and [5] against each other.) to build an electrochromic cell comprising a cavity delimited by said first and second internal faces; (See fig. 2B, first and second ophthalmic lenses [4] and [5] are pressed together to form cavity [6]) an adhesive substance applied on at least one predetermined point of at least one of said first and second internal faces in order to seal said cavity; and (Fig. 6 shows adhesive [20] applied to one of the lenses. Additionally para. [0051] and fig. 2B teach that the adhesive is used to form a seal [11] for cavity [6]) Ballet fails to teach or suggest, a holder provided with a vacuum propagating element enabling said holder to grip one of said first and second external faces, said contact area being located in a central area of said first and second ophthalmic lenses and said holder comprising a tubular rod and said pressing device comprising a cup arranged at an end of said tubular rod, said cup having a central hole , said tubular rod and said central hole forming a duct for propagating said vacuum. (While Ballet teaches that pressing device [18] is used as a holder it does not teach the use of a vacuum element or cup as a part of the holder.) Stein teaches an assembly for holding a lens comprising: a holder provided with a vacuum propagating element (See fig. 15C showing a holder with a vacuum propagating element [1514]) enabling said holder to grip one of said first and second external faces, (Fig. 17B showing the use of the holder for gripping an external face of a lens element.) said contact area being located in a central area of said first and second ophthalmic lenses (See fig. 15A showing that the contact area of the holder is aligned with a central area [1522] of the lens [1500]) and said holder comprising a tubular rod (Fig. 15C, vacuum cylinder [1514] is the tubular rod.) and said pressing device comprising a cup arranged at an end of said tubular rod (Fig. 15C, cup [1518]), said cup having a central hole (Fig. 15C, The central hole on the side of the cup [1518] adjacent to the tubular rod [1514], annotated fig. 15C provided below for clarity), said tubular rod and said central hole forming a duct for propagating said vacuum (Fig. 15C depicts the duct for propagating the vacuum with dotted lines.). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the holder with a vacuum propagating element as taught by Stein as the holder of Ballet for the purpose of holding one of the lenses during pressing. Annotated Fig. 15C: PNG media_image1.png 278 622 media_image1.png Greyscale For the purposes of compact prosecution the examiner notes that the holds on the lens holding side of cup [1518] provide a net for centered on the center of the lens. If reducing the number of holes in the lens side of the cup one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious for a single hole to be at the center of the lens for the purpose of keeping the net force centered on the lens. Claims 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180196283 A1 (Ballet et al.) in view of US 20200311661 A1 (Stein) as applied to claims 1-5 above, and further in view of US Patent 5,928,537 (Fortune). Regarding claims 2-5: Claims 2-5 are directed towards the shape of the cup of claim 1. Although Ballet in view of Stein teaches the assembly of claim 1 they do not teach or suggest, wherein said cup has a round shape, an oval shape, or star shape with any number of branches. (Although Stein teaches the shape of the cup [1518] is has a shape (Fig. 15B, block shape [1508]) to match the lens it is silent on the exact shape.) Fortune teaches a vacuum holding assembly with a cup (Fig. 13, [150]) wherein The cup has a variety of shapes (See figs. 12, 15, and 18 for examples. Additionally Col. 2 lines 17-20 teaching that the size and shape of the holding cup is adapted for the purpose of holding different parts.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the shape of the cup be a circle, oval, or a star shape with any number of branches, since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being with in the level of ordinary skill in the art when the change in shape is not significant to the function of the combination. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Regarding claims 6-10: Claims 6-10 are directed towards the cup having “a circumferential groove provided with a toric joint.” While Ballet in combination with Stein teaches the assemblies of claims 1-5 they fail to teach or suggest wherein said cup has a circumferential groove provided with a toric joint. Fortune teaches a vacuum holding assembly with a cup (Fig. 13, [150]) wherein said cup has a circumferential groove (Fig. 13, circumferential groove [148]) provided with a toric joint. (Fig. 13, toric joint [146]) Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the cup have a circumferential groove provided with a toric joint as taught by Fortune in the assembly of Ballet in combination with Stein for the purpose of improving the gripping of the holder. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent 11,774,826 B2 (Yutani) and US Patent 11,624,962 B2 (Kloeppner) additionally teach the use of an adhesive substance used for sealing the cavity of an electrochromic device. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH D MOSER whose telephone number is (703)756-5803. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 10am-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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)270-1782. 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. /SETH D MOSER/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 /BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 15, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601957
IMAGE SHAKE CORRECTING MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12560786
OPTICAL SYSTEM, IMAGE PROJECTION APPARATUS, AND IMAGING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12535646
FILTER ASSEMBLY AND UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12535665
ZOOM LENS, PROJECTION TYPE DISPLAY DEVICE, AND IMAGING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12521968
LAMINATED PANE WITH A HOLOGRAPHIC ELEMENT AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 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
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 38 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