Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/686,653

MEMS Based Beam Steering with DC and Side Lobe Suppression

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 26, 2024
Examiner
TALLMAN, ROBERT E
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Arizona Board of Regents
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
613 granted / 753 resolved
+13.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
782
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
42.8%
+2.8% vs TC avg
§102
34.4%
-5.6% vs TC avg
§112
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 753 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 02/26/24 was filed. The submission is 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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takashima et. al. (WO 2020/023969 A1) in view of Hua et. al. (US 2020/0110250 A1). Regarding claim 1 Takashima teaches (figs. 10a – 11c, and 17a - 20) an optical system for modulating a light beam emitted by a laser light source, comprising: a. a phase light modulation device (110) positioned to receive the laser light beam (para. 0034, 0095); b. a 4f relay optics positioned to receive light emitted from the phase light modulation device (para. 0078), and having a tilt mirror positioned in the light path, the tilt mirror having a center hole that permits light to pass therethrough and relay to a focusing lens, whereby a modulated and linearly polarized beam is transmitted (fpara. 0045, see fig. 7); and d. a digital micromirror device (16) comprising an array of micromirrors and that modulates amplitude of light in a pixelated manner by redirecting light into two directions comprising an on direction and an off direction, by electrically controlling the tilt angle of each micromirror (para. 0045-0046, and 0063-0064). Takashima does not teach a quarter wave plate having a polarized beam splitter positioned to receive the modulated and linearly polarized beam. Hua teaches (fig. 14) a quarter wave plate (108) having a polarized beam splitter (116) positioned to receive the modulated and linearly polarized beam (para. 0052). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the optical system as taught by Takashima with the quarter wave plate as taught by Hua for the benefit of higher beam alignment capabilities. Regarding claim 2 Takashima as modified by Hua teaches (figs. 10a – 11c, and 17a - 20) an optical system, further comprising a polarizer that separates a rejected beam by a first interaction with the digital micromirror device from a diffracted beam by a second interaction of the beam with the digital micromirror device (para. 0072; see fig. 10). Regarding claim 3 Takashima as modified by Hua teaches (figs. 10a – 11c, and 17a - 20) an optical system, where the phase light modulation device is one of a liquid crystal on silicon and a MEMS phase light modulator (para. 0094). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Further optical systems include Fujii (US 2012/0249989 A1), Futterer (US 2016/0327906 A1), and Takashima et. al. (US 2021/0144347 A1). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT E TALLMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3958. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 a.m. -6 p.m.. 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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571-272-2333. 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. /Robert E. Tallman/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 26, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12585097
OPTICAL APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571986
HELIOSTAT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12566281
MICROLENS ARRAY FOR ACQUIRING MULTI-FOCUS PLENOPTIC IMAGE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12560801
WAVELENGTH CONVERSION MODULE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12554145
LIGHT DIFFRACTION ELEMENT UNIT, MULTISTAGE LIGHT DIFFRACTION DEVICE, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR MULTISTAGE LIGHT DIFFRACTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
81%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+14.9%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 753 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