Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/686,394

HIGH NUMERICAL APERTURE IMAGING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 23, 2024
Examiner
ALEXANDER, WILLIAM R
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Navitar, INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
765 granted / 867 resolved
+20.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
898
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
46.8%
+6.8% vs TC avg
§102
34.3%
-5.7% vs TC avg
§112
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 867 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 2/23/2024 was considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2, the phrase “an unique” is assumed to be a typographical error and should have been written “[[an]]a unique”. Additionally, in line 6, the phrase “… of an aperture stop;” should have been written “… of an aperture stop[[;]], and”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsui (US 2010/0014154) in view of Chen et al. (US 2021/0222239). Regarding Claim 1, Matsui discloses a microscope assembly kit (Fig. 17 and Fig. 38), comprising: (a) multiple lens assemblies each having a unique combination among said lens assemblies of effective focal length and numerical aperture (Paragraph 0125, lines 1-11, Fig. 17 plurality of kinds of objective lenses, both a low-power 11(1) and a high-power 11(2) providing different magnifications by having different focal lengths and numerical apertures, the plurality of kinds of objective lenses, as shown in Fig. 38); (b) a microscope housing (microscope as shown in Fig. 17 and the turret in Fig. 38) configured to contain combinations of said lens assemblies each forming a microscope assembly that includes an objective lens (Fig. 17, plurality of kinds of objective lenses, both a low-power 11(1) and a high-power 11(2)) and a tube lens disposed on object and image sides (Fig. 17, elements 20, 13, and 14), respectively, of an aperture stop (Fig. 17, aperture stop 12); (c) wherein said microscope assembly is configured to form images with both (i) a numerical aperture equal to the numerical aperture of the objective lens (Paragraph 0125, lines 8-9, different focal length not numerical aperture, because either focal length or numerical aperture are changed), and (ii) a magnification equal to a ratio of effective focal lengths of the tube lens and the objective lens (Paragraph 0122, lines 14-17, magnification). Matsui does not specifically disclose a diffraction limited lens. However, Chen, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a diffraction limited lens (Paragraph 0130, lines 1-6), for the purpose of reducing aberration in a microscope image. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the microscope assembly kit of Matsui with the diffraction limited lens, of Chen, for the purpose of reducing aberration in a microscope image. Regarding Claim 9, Matsui in view of Chen discloses as is set forth above and Matsui further discloses comprising a wide field of view lens (Paragraph 0221, lines 1-7, wide field of view) attachment lens assembly that includes two meniscus lenses (Tenth Embodiment, Fig. 30, Table 7, lenses L11 and L21 are both positive meniscuses). Regarding Claim 10, Matsui in view of Chen discloses as is set forth above and Matsui further discloses wherein the wide field of view lens (Paragraph 0221, lines 1-7, wide field of view) attachment lens assembly further includes a biconvex lens (Tenth Embodiment, Fig. 30, Table 7, lens L22 is biconvex). Regarding Claim 11, Matsui in view of Chen discloses as is set forth above and Matsui further discloses wherein the wide field of view lens (Paragraph 0221, lines 1-7, wide field of view) attachment lens assembly further includes two biconvex lenses (Tenth Embodiment, Fig. 30, Table 7, lenses L22 and L25 are biconvex). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-8 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: with respect to the allowable subject matter, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of the claimed combination of limitations to warrant a rejection under 35 USC 102 or 103. Specifically, with respect to claim 2, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of a microscope assembly kit including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein comprising one or more combinations of said lens assemblies each forming said microscope assembly with a numerical aperture above 0.1 and a magnification of 2× or more. Specifically, with respect to claim 3, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of a microscope assembly kit including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein comprising two or more combinations of said lens assemblies each forming said microscope assembly with a numerical aperture above 0.1 and a magnification of 2× or more. Specifically, with respect to claim 4, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of a microscope assembly kit including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein comprising one or more combinations of said lens assemblies each forming said microscope assembly with a numerical aperture above 0.14 and a magnification of 2× or more. Specifically, with respect to claim 5, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of a microscope assembly kit including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein comprising two or more combinations of said lens assemblies each forming said microscope assembly with a numerical aperture above 0.14 and a magnification of 2× or more. Specifically, with respect to claim 6, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of a microscope assembly kit including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein comprising one or more combinations of said lens assemblies each forming said microscope assembly with a numerical aperture not less than 0.18 and a magnification of 2× or more. Specifically, with respect to claim 7, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of a microscope assembly kit including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein comprising two or more combinations of said lens assemblies each forming said microscope assembly with a numerical aperture not less than 0.18 and a magnification of 2× or more. Specifically, with respect to claim 8, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of a microscope assembly kit including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein comprising at least one 3× magnification lens assembly with a numerical aperture not less than 0.18. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lichtman et al. (US 4,884,880), Tamano (US 2016/0054554), Cohen et al. (US 2016/0062100), Byler (US 2018/0217365), Schulz et al. (US 2018/0307021), and Eisenberg (US 2022/0099953) are cited to show similar microscopes. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM R ALEXANDER whose telephone number is (571)270-7656. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM- 4:00 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 on (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 R ALEXANDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 23, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 26, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599301
SYSTEM FOR CONDUCTING EYE EXAMINATIONS FOR VISUAL ACUITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591116
OPTICAL LENS, OPTICAL MODULE, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585142
SPECTACLE LENS DESIGN, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING A SPECTACLE LENS AND METHOD OF PROVIDING A SPECTACLE LENS FOR AT LEAST RETARDING MYOPIA PROGRESSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578536
BRAGG GRATINGS FOR AN AUGMENTED REALITY DISPLAY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571991
LENS MODULE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
95%
With Interview (+6.5%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 867 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month