Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/623,227

ILLUMINATED RADOME COVER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 01, 2024
Examiner
HAMMOND, CRYSTAL L
Art Unit
2838
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Magna Exteriors GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
809 granted / 921 resolved
+19.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
934
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
37.6%
-2.4% vs TC avg
§102
54.5%
+14.5% vs TC avg
§112
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 921 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/1/2024 and 8/16/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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. Claims 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paule et al. (US 2022/0357021) in view of Fukui (JP 7188628). (1) regarding Claim 1: Paule discloses: A radome cover (Fig 1) in a vehicle, which has a decorative film (5 in Figs 3 and 6), which is over-injected on an inner surface using a layer made of a first plastic to produce a light guiding layer (6 in Figs 3 and 6; [0039], [0044]-[0047]) and is back-injected on an outer surface using a cover layer (4 in Figs 3 and 6, [0044]), However, Paule does not disclose the reflection ring specifics. Fukui, in the same field of endeavor, discloses: a decorative film (40 in Fig 2), which is over-injected on an inner surface using a layer made of a first plastic to produce a light guiding layer (30 in Fig 2, [0065]), wherein a reflection ring (51) having at least one metallically reflective surface is introduced on the inner surface (42b) on the decorative film (40, 42), wherein the light propagates along the height of the light guiding elements (32) by total reflection and is coupled by the inclined plane of the reflection ring (51) into the light guiding layer ([0044-0046]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the features of Fukui into the device of Paule in order to improve light coupling as taught by Fukui. (2) regarding Claim 2: The combination of Paule and Fukui further discloses: wherein the light guiding layer is covered using a reflective film which reflects the visible light into the light guiding layer ([0044]). (3) regarding Claim 3: The combination of Paule and Fukui further discloses: wherein the light guiding layer has light guiding elements directly connected to the reflection ring, which rise at least up to the height of the reflection ring (See 9 in Fig 6 and [0044] of Paule). (4) regarding Claim 4: The combination of Paule and Fukui further discloses: wherein the light guiding elements either are a light guiding ring having an external diameter which corresponds to the internal diameter of the reflection ring or consist of light guiding domes (See 9 in Fig 6 and [0044] of Paule). (5) regarding Claim 5: The combination of Paule and Fukui further discloses: wherein the light guiding elements guide light from LEDs (circuit board ring 8 with LEDs 8b of Paule), which are mounted on a circuit board that is installed between the radome cover and a radar sensor ([0042] of Paule). (6) regarding Claim 6: The combination of Paule and Fukui further discloses: wherein the decorative film comprises a heating element or is used as a carrier for a heating element ([0023], [0039], [0044] of Paule). (7) regarding Claim 7: For method claim 7, note that under MPEP 2112.02, the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device “1 inherently performs the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 UPSQ 136 (Fed Cir. 1986). Therefore the previous rejections based on the apparatus will not be repeated. Remarks The Office has cited particular columns, line numbers, paragraph numbers, references, or figures in the references applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses to fully consider the reference in entirety, as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2141.02 and § 2123. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CRYSTAL L HAMMOND whose telephone number is (571)270-1682. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12pm-4pm Alt Fridays. 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, Dimary Lopez can be reached at (571)270-7893. 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. /CRYSTAL L HAMMOND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 01, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603432
ANTENNA AND WEARABLE ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING SAME ANTENNA
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592490
ANTENNA AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587187
CIRCUIT AND DEVICE INCLUDING A TRANSISTOR AND DIODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580156
SOLID-STATE MATCH (SSM)-GENERATOR SYNCHRONIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12580315
ANTENNA APPARATUS AND VEHICLE INCLUDING THE SAME
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+4.1%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 921 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