Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/621,186

PROJECTOR

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 29, 2024
Priority
Mar 31, 2023 — JP 2023-057586
Examiner
HOWARD, RYAN D
Art Unit
2882
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Seiko Epson Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
825 granted / 1037 resolved
+11.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1050
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
48.3%
+8.3% vs TC avg
§102
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
§112
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1037 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . 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. Regarding claim 1, the limitation ‘two small lenses contained in a corresponding light incident region enter a corresponding one of the second small lenses’ in lines 16-17 is indefinite inasmuch as one lens does not enter into the other lens. In claim 1, there are a plurality of partial pencils of light, and these pencils of light travel from the first lens array to the second lens array. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret this limitation as ‘partial pencils of light from two firs small lenses contained in a corresponding light incident region enter a corresponding one of the second small lenses’. Claims 2-9 are rejected inasmuch as they depend from claim 1. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 1, the prior art does not teach the corresponding one of the second small lenses and the superimposing lens form, on the image forming area, images of first small lenses adjacent in the corresponding light incident region at different positions, so that the image formation area is illuminated by the divided partial pencils of light emitted from the first small lenses contained in the corresponding light incident region. 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D HOWARD whose telephone number is (571)270-5358. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5:00. 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, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached at 5712722303. 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. /RYAN D HOWARD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882 9/02/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 29, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 18, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 04, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12730369
PROJECTOR
2y 8m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12724285
SPECKLE-REDUCED ILLUMINATION FOR IMPROVED SCATTERING-BASED MICROSCOPY
3y 11m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12724335
PROJECTION DEVICE, PROJECTION CONTROL METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12717223
ILLUMINATION DEVICE, METHOD OF CONTROLLING ILLUMINATION DEVICE, AND PROJECTION DISPLAY APPARATUS
3y 6m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12720025
ELECTRONIC DEVICE, DEVICE MANAGEMENT SERVER, CONTROL METHOD FOR ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND CONTROL METHOD FOR DEVICE MANAGEMENT SERVER
2y 10m to grant Granted Aug 25, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+12.8%)
2y 4m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1037 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