Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/601,822

ILLUMINATION ASSEMBLY FOR A MACHINE VISION SYSTEM

Final Rejection §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 11, 2024
Examiner
PHAN, MINH Q
Art Unit
2852
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Cognex Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
70%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
626 granted / 827 resolved
+7.7% vs TC avg
Minimal -5% lift
Without
With
+-5.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
858
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
43.5%
+3.5% vs TC avg
§102
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 827 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 01/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant alleges that Skaff does not teach or suggest a housing with a first shelf defining a first position with the housing and a second shelf located below the first shelf defining a second position within the housing, however the applicant is respectfully reminded that, while it might be evident, by comparing the patented structure of Skaff with the instant specification and drawings, that the claimed invention is different from the Prior Art made of record, that is not the test for patentability. Rather, it is the language of the claims what defines the meets and bounds of the instant invention. In this case, Skaff teaches the housing with a first shelf (1213) defining a first position with the housing and a second shelf (1212) located below the first shelf defining a second position within the housing (the second shelf 1212 is configured to position lower compared to the first shelf 1213, see Fig. 13). 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 1-9 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. The limitation “the single circuit board” as recited in claim 1 lacks antecedent basis, therefore it is unclear whether “the single circuit board” refers to the previously recited circuit board or a new circuit board in the claim. Claims 2-9 are also rejected because of their dependency on 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. Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 8-11 and 16-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Skaff et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0303445). Regarding claims 1, 3-5, 8-9 and 20-22 Skaff teaches an illumination assembly for a machine vision system, the illumination assembly comprising: a housing (1210, 1250) comprising a first shelf (1212) defining a first position within the housing and a second shelf (1213) located below the first shelf defining a second position within the housing; a circuit board disposed within the housing (each of the light modules 1230, 1240 is placed on a circuit board, para. 101); a plurality of light sources disposed within the housing and configured to be coupled to the circuit board (each of the light modules 1230, 1240 comprises an array of LEDs, para. 101); and a plurality of illumination optics assemblies disposed within the housing and removably coupled to the housing, each illumination optics assembly corresponding to one of the plurality of light sources (each of the light modules 1230, 1240 comprises a lens, para. 113); wherein the housing is configured to support the circuit board at one of the first position or the second position within the housing based on an illumination optics assembly type of the plurality of illumination optics assemblies (each of the circuit boards of the light modules 1230, 1240 can be positioned at either one of the first shelf or the second shelf). wherein each of the plurality of light sources (1230) is a mono-color light source, each of the illumination optics assemblies comprises a lens, and the circuit board is located at the first position within the housing (para. 113) [claim 3]; wherein the lens is one of a wide field of view (FOV) lens, a standard FOV lens, a narrow FOV lens, or an elliptical FOV lens (para, 66) [claim 4]; wherein each of the plurality of light sources is a multispectral light source (para. 66) [claim 5]; a thermal control assembly (1214) thermally coupled to circuit board and comprising a heat conductor (para. 112) [claims 8, 21]; a distance sensor (136 and 138); and an aimer (the second shelf 1213 comprises a wedge configured to aim the light assembly, Fig. 13) [claim 9]; and the circuit board disposed within the housing is a single circuit board (the circuit board 1132/1142 is a single circuit board) [claim 22]. Regarding claims 10-11 and 16-19, Skaff teaches a machine vision system comprising: an image sensor assembly including an image sensor (1222); an imaging optics assembly comprising a lens (1223), the imaging optics assembly coupled to the image sensor assembly; and an illumination assembly (1230, 1240) coupled to the imaging optics assembly, the illumination assembly comprising: a housing (Fig. 13, items 1222, 1210, 1250) having an opening configured to receive the imaging optics assembly, and a first shelf (1212) defining a first position within the housing and a second shelf (1213) located below the first shelf defining a second position within the housing; a circuit board (1232 or 1242) disposed within the housing; a plurality of light sources disposed within the housing and configured to be coupled to the circuit board; and a plurality of illumination optics assemblies (1230, 1240) disposed within the housing and removably coupled to the housing, each illumination optics assembly corresponding to one of the plurality of light sources; wherein the housing is configured to support the circuit board at one of the first position or second position within the housing based on an illumination optics assembly type of the plurality of illumination optics assemblies (each of the circuit boards of the light modules 1230, 1240 can be positioned at either one of the first shelf or the second shelf); wherein each of the plurality of light sources is a multispectral light source (para. 66) [claim 11]; wherein the illumination assembly processor device in communication with the plurality of light sources, wherein the illumination assembly processor device is configured to selectively activate a subset of the plurality of light sources in an illumination pattern corresponding to a desired field of view (FOV) (para. 86) [claim 16]; wherein the FOV is one of a wide FOV, an intermediate FOV, or a narrow FOV (para. 86) [claim 17]; an image sensor assembly processor device, wherein the image sensor assembly processor device is configured to determine the illumination pattern and the desired FOV based on a working distance (para. 119) [claim 18]; and wherein the illumination assembly includes a distance sensor configured to determine the working distance (para. 58) [claim 19]. 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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skaff in view of Boron et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0191363). Regarding claim 2, Skaff teaches all the claimed limitations except for a cover positioned in front of the housing and coupled to the housing, wherein the cover comprises a plurality of openings configured to receive the plurality of illumination optics assemblies. Boron teaches an illumination assembly comprises a cover (5) positioned in front of the housing (12) and coupled to the housing, wherein the cover comprises a plurality of openings configured to receive the plurality of illumination optics assemblies (3). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a cover as taught by Boron in order to facilitate positioning of the plurality of illumination optics assemblies. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skaff in view of Angelini et al. (US Patent No. 10,663,651). Regarding claim 6, Skaff teaches all the claimed limitations except for each of the illumination optics assemblies includes a light pipe and projection lens. Angelini teaches an illumination assembly comprises a light pipe (130) and projection lens (140). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify each of the illumination assemblies to include a light pipe and a projection lens as taught by Angeline in order to facilitate focusing the emitted light toward a desired area (Angelini’s col. 7, ll. 37-44). Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skaff in view of Yabe (US Pub. No. 2020/0345221). Regarding claims 12-13, Skaff teaches all the claimed limitations except for an illumination sensor positioned to detect light transmitted from the illumination assembly and configured to measure the intensity of the detected light and an illumination assembly processor device in communication with the plurality of light sources, the illumination sensor assembly processor device configured to control activation of the plurality of light sources based on measured intensity of the detected light. Yabe teaches a machine vision system comprises an illumination sensor (44) positioned to detect light transmitted from the illumination assembly and configured to measure the intensity of the detected light and an illumination assembly processor device in communication with the plurality of light sources (45), the illumination sensor assembly processor device configured to control activation of the plurality of light sources based on measured intensity of the detected light (para. 84-86, 99). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate an illumination sensor as taught by Yabe within said machine vision system in order to facilitate adjustment of the light intensity from the plurality of light sources. Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skaff in view of Yoshida (US Patent No. 7,378,630), and further in view of Mok et al. (US 7,519,287). Regarding claims 14-15, Skaff teaches all the claimed limitations except for an illumination assembly processor device in communication with the plurality of light sources, and wherein the illumination assembly processor device is configured to perform at least one of activating the color LEDs in a predetermined order or adjusting an exposure of the plurality of color LEDs, and wherein the illumination assembly processor device is configured to activate the plurality of color LEDs in the predetermined order during a single exposure time or adjust an exposure time of the plurality of color LEDs during a single exposure time [claim 15]. Yoshida teaches an illumination assembly comprises: an illumination assembly processor device (250) in communication with the plurality of light sources (210), and wherein the illumination assembly processor device is configured to perform at least one of activating the color LEDs in a predetermined order or adjusting an exposure of the plurality of color LEDs, and wherein the illumination assembly processor device is configured to activate the plurality of color LEDs in the predetermined order during a single exposure time or adjust an exposure time of the plurality of color LEDs during a single exposure time (col. 4, ll. 25-31). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate an illumination assembly as taught by Yoshida within said machine vision system in order to facilitate more efficient lighting control for said machine vision system. Skaff, as modified by Yoshida, does not specifically teach each of the plurality of light sources is a multispectral source having a plurality of color LED dies. Mok teaches an illumination assembly comprises a plurality of light sources is a multispectral source having a plurality of color LED dies (col. 5, ll. 42-56). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a plurality of color LED dies as taught by Mok for said plurality of LEDs in order to obtain a smaller and compact system. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH Q PHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3898. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm. 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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. MINH Q. PHAN Primary Examiner Art Unit 2852 /MINH Q PHAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 11, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jan 16, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601955
DRIVING DEVICE, OPTICAL ELEMENT DRIVING DEVICE, CAMERA MODULE, AND CAMERA-EQUIPPED DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595876
SIX-AXIS AGILE SHOOTING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591176
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR TREATING A RELIEF PRECURSOR WITH LIQUID
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585083
LENS APPARATUS, IMAGE PICKUP APPARATUS, METHOD OF CONTROLLING LENS APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578365
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DETECTING A VOLTAGE DROP
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
70%
With Interview (-5.2%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 827 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