Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/681,679

PHOTON AND/OR PHOTOELECTRON DRIVEN FULL-COLOUR REFLECTIVE PASSIVE SCREEN

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Feb 06, 2024
Examiner
CHOI, WILLIAM C
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Freshape SA
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
1031 granted / 1114 resolved
+24.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1135
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
§102
51.9%
+11.9% vs TC avg
§112
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1114 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/6/2024 was filed 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 § 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 2-4, 8, 9 (and dependent claim 10), 11, 15 (and dependent claim 16), and 18 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 dependent claim(s) inherit the rejection from their respective parent claim(s). Specifically, in claims 2, 3, and 8, applicant discloses wherein said support material comprises “a 3D scaffold” and “a surface increasing structure,” but does not provide further explanation of the structure of said scaffold or description of the surface being increased and how, thereby rendering the claim vague and indefinite. For purposes of examination, it was presumed applicant intended to disclose --a 3D surface structure--. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 4 recites the broad recitation “wherein said support material comprises and/or consist essentially of a photo-sensitizer material,” and the claim also recites “preferably a semi-conducting photo-sensitizer material” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. For purposes of examination, it was presumed applicant intended to disclose -- wherein said support material comprises and/or consists essentially of a semi-conducting photo-sensitizer material--. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 18 recites the broad recitation “a projector” and “a light emitting panel”, and the claim also recites “preferably a laser projector” and “preferably selected from an LED display, a liquid crystal display, and from a plasma display,” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. For purposes of examination, it was presumed applicant intended to disclose --a laser projector, an LED display, a liquid crystal display, and a plasma display--. Claim 8 recites the limitation "said second chromic material" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, it was presumed that claim 8 was intended to depend from claim 6 where a “second chromic material” is disclosed. Claim 9 recites the limitation "said chromic materials" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, it was presumed that claim 9 was intended to depend from claim 6, where “at least first and second chromic materials” is disclosed. Claim 11 recites the limitation "said third support material" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, it was presumed that claim 11 was intended to depend from claim 10, where a “third support material” is disclosed. Claim 15 recites the limitation "said second chromic material" in lines 10-12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, it was presumed that claim 15 was intended to depend from claim 9, where a “second chromic material” is disclosed in parent claim 6. (Claim 9 also discloses a “third chromic material,” which accounts for its disclosure in dependent claim 16). Claim 20 recites the limitation "said third wavelength" in line 4 and “third chromic materials” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, it was presumed that claim 20 was intended to depend from claim 11, where a “third wavelength” and a “third chromic material” are disclosed. 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, 2, 7, 14, 17, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsutsui et al (JP 2004-264424 A – Translation). In regard to claim 1, Tsutsui et al discloses a screen (page 5, section [0023] – page 7, section [0033] and page 15, [Explanation of symbols], Figures 2 & 3) comprising first and second substrates (Figure 2, “9, 14”), a space between said substrates (Figure 2, “9, 14”), a support material (Figure 2, “10”) and a chromic material (Figure 2, “11”), wherein: said support material is provided in said space (Figure 2, “9, 10, 14”); said chromic material is selected from photoelectrochromic materials, photochromic materials, and combinations thereof, said chromic material preferably having the property of changing color when activated by way of electromagnetic radiation or by way a photoelectron that is generated by way of electromagnetic radiation (page 7, section [0033], Figure 2, “11,” re: photochromic); and, said chromic material is provided on said support material (Figure 2, “10, 11”). Regarding claim 2, Tsutsui et al discloses wherein said support material comprises one or more selected from nanoparticles or a 3D surface structure (Figure 2, “11”), wherein said chromic material is provided on or and/or in contact with said nanoparticles or 3D surface structure, respectively (Figure 2, “10”). Regarding claim 7, Tsutsui et al discloses wherein said support material comprises a first support material (Figure 2, “10”) and a second support material (Figure 2, “12”), wherein said first and second support materials are different (page 5, section [0024]). Regarding claim 14, Tsutsui et al discloses a screen system comprising said screen, a light emitting device, and a driver unit, wherein said light emitting device is configured by the driver unit, to emit light in the direction of said screen so as to activate said chromic material and/or said support material (page 3, section [0013] – page 4, section [0018]). Regarding claim 17, Tsutsui et al discloses wherein said driver unit is suitable to adjust the intensity and/or duration of light emission of said light emitting device (page 4, sections [0018]-[0020]). Regarding claim 18, Tsutsui et al discloses wherein said light emitting device comprises one selected from the group consisting of: a laser projector, an LED display, a liquid crystal display, and a plasma display (page 4, section [0019]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5, 6, 12, and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 5: a screen as claimed, specifically wherein said support material exhibits a conduction band minimum and wherein said chromic material exhibits a reduction potential, wherein said conduction band minimum is less negative than said reduction potential. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 6: a screen as claimed, specifically wherein said chromic material comprise at least first and second chromic materials that have first and second colors when activated, wherein said first and second colors are different, and wherein said at least first and second chromic materials are provided on said support material. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 12: a screen as claimed, specifically comprising an electrode provided on said first substrate, said electrode being in electric contact with said support material. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 13: a screen as claimed, specifically comprising an electrolyte provided between said substrates. Claims 3, 4, 8-11, 15, 16, 20, and 21 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, taking into account the presumption made in the examination of the claim. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 3: a screen as claimed, specifically wherein said chromic material is adsorbed on said nanoparticles and/or 3D surface structure, respectively. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim 4: a screen as claimed, specifically wherein said support material comprises and/or consists essentially of a semi-conducting photo-sensitizer material. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM C CHOI whose telephone number is (571)272-2324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday, 9:00 am - 6:00 pm. 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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. /WILLIAM CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 December 27, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 06, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596264
DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596246
OPTICAL SYSTEM AND HEAD MOUNTED DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596263
OPTICAL MODULE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591127
Optical Data Insertion
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591132
METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR SPATIALLY FILTERING OPTICAL PULSES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
92%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+4.1%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1114 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