Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/699,217

ANTIREFLECTIVE OPTICAL ELEMENT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 05, 2024
Examiner
MOSER, SETH DAVID
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
UNIVERSITE DE POITIERS
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allow Rate
38 granted / 38 resolved
+32.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
48
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
44.0%
+4.0% vs TC avg
§102
34.6%
-5.4% vs TC avg
§112
21.4%
-18.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 38 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 . Claim Objections Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 contains a limitation with an additional word “first index refractive index” should be “first refractive index” The amendment to claim 8 appears to have lined through the degree symbol removing it. 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. Claims 1, and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220010422 A1 (Kasuya et al.). Regarding claim 1: Kasuya teaches an optronic device (para. [0002], Kasuya discloses a dialectric film to be used in a vehicle camera) comprising a an optical element), each optical element comprising: a transparent substrate (Fig. 1, substrate [101]), an intermediate coating extending over at least one main surface of the substrate, the intermediate coating comprising a plurality of dense thin layers which alternate in having a first index refractive index and a second refractive index, the first refractive index being greater than the second refractive index, (Fig. 2, layers [102] through [105] form the intermediate coating with layers alternating between high and low refractive index layers.) and at least one porous layer (Fig. 3A through 3D shows that upper layer [106] is a porous layer, See also Paras. [0038] through [0041]) extending over the intermediate coating [102]-[105], opposite the substrate [101], the porous layer having a third refractive index (Table 2 shows embodiments where the porous layer is SiO2 with a refractive index for the material of 1.429), the third refractive index being lower than the first and second refractive (Table 2 shows embodiments where the low index layer layer is SiO2 with a refractive index for the material of 1.429) indices. (The refractive index of the porous layer [106] is reduced by the addition of pores to the material, thus the porous layer has a refractive index lower than the low refractive index made of the same material.) Kasuya does not disclose The optronic device comprising a plurality of optical elements aligned along an optical axis so as to be passed through by a same light beam. However it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to duplicate the optical elements along a common optical axis, since it has been held that a mere duplication of working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Regarding claim 5: Kasuya teaches the optronic device according to claim 1, wherein the porous layer has a porosity of between 5% and 50%. (Para. [0137], the porous layer [106] has a porosity of 50%) Regarding claim 6: While Kasuya doesn’t explicitly teach an aircraft comprising the optronic device according to claim 1 Kasuya teaches in para. [0230] that the properties of the optical device make it suitable for an in-vehicle lens. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the are that this would include vehicles such as aircraft. Claims 2-4, and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220010422 A1 (Kasuya et al.) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20120259411 A1 (Hong et al.). Regarding claim 2: While Kasuya teaches the optronic device according to claim 1, Kasuya fails to teach the porous layer comprises elongate elements extending from an external surface of the intermediate coating. Hong teaches a porous layer wherein the porous layer comprises elongate elements extending from an external surface of the intermediate coating. (Fig. 5 shows the porous layer with elongated elements [44] extending from surface [42]) Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the porous layer comprises elongate elements extending from an external surface of the intermediate coating as taught by Hong in the optronic device of Kasuya for the purpose of providing a porous layer formed by oblique deposition. Regarding claim 3: Kasuya in combination with Hong teaches the optronic device according to claim 2, Hong additionally teaches wherein the elongate elements are columns that are rectilinear (Fig. 5 [44]) or have helical shapes (Fig. 12, helical columns [110]). The motivation for combining is the same as in claim 2 above. Regarding claim 4: Kasuya in combination with Hong teaches the optronic device according to claim 2, Hong additionally teaches wherein each elongate element extends along an axis (X) forming a non-zero angle (a) with a local normal to the external surface of the intermediate coating. (Figs. 4 and 5 angle θA) The motivation for combining is the same as in claim 2 above. Regarding claim 7: Kasuya teaches the optical element of claim 1 While Kasuya additionally teaches A method for manufacturing the optical element according to claim 1, the method comprising steps of: supplying a substrate [101] and placing the substrate [101] in a deposition device, (Fig. 2, the substrate is shown as [4] is placed in deposition device [1]) depositing thin layers which successively have the first index and the second index [102]-[105], on at least one main surface of the substrate [101] so as to form the intermediate coating, (Fig. 4 step [S11], Para. [0143] the multilayer film excluding the uppermost layer (porous layer) is formed by a vapor deposition method on the substrate.) Kasuya does not teach depositing the porous layer on an external surface of the intermediate coating, opposite the substrate, using a method of oblique angle deposition. (Fig. 4, kasuya teaches a method involving steps [S13] to [S16] involving formation of the pores using a mask.) Hong teaches a method for manufacturing an optical element with a porous later comprising: depositing the porous layer (Fig. 5, [44]) on an external surface of the intermediate coating (Fig. 5 [42]), opposite the substrate [42], using a method of oblique angle deposition (Figs. 4 to 6 showing oblique angle deposition, and Para. [0033]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have depositing the porous layer on an external surface of the intermediate coating, opposite the substrate, using a method of oblique angle deposition as taught by Hong in the method of Kasuya for the purpose of forming the porous layer at an angle. Regarding claim 8: Kasuya in combination with Hong teaches the method according to claim 7, Hong additionally teaches during the step of depositing the porous layer, an angle of incidence of a deposition beam, measured relative to a local normal to the external surface of the intermediate coating, is between 0° and 80°. (Fig. 7 and Para. [0036], curve [70] is based on a 60° angle.) The motivation for combining is the same as claim 7 above. Regarding claim 9: Kasuya in combination with Hong teaches the method according to claim 8, Hong additionally teaches during the step of depositing the porous layer, the substrate rotates at a controlled rotation speed about an axis of rotation perpendicular to the external surface. (Para. [0043], to form helical columns the substrate is rotated at a constant speed.) The motivation for combining is the same as claim 7 above. Kasuya in combination with Hong teaches the method according to claim 8, Hong additionally teaches the angle of incidence of the deposition beam is between 40° and 70°. (Fig. 7 and Para. [0036], curve [70] is based on a 60° angle. The motivation for combining is the same as claim 7 above. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH D MOSER whose telephone number is (703)756-5803. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 10am-6pm. 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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)270-1782. 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. /SETH D MOSER/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 /WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 05, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601957
IMAGE SHAKE CORRECTING MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12560786
OPTICAL SYSTEM, IMAGE PROJECTION APPARATUS, AND IMAGING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12535646
FILTER ASSEMBLY AND UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12535665
ZOOM LENS, PROJECTION TYPE DISPLAY DEVICE, AND IMAGING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12521968
LAMINATED PANE WITH A HOLOGRAPHIC ELEMENT AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 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
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 38 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