Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/711,014

ELECTRIC FIELD EMISSION DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 16, 2024
Examiner
YUN, JURIE
Art Unit
2884
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Waseda University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
624 granted / 715 resolved
+19.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
732
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§103
34.0%
-6.0% vs TC avg
§102
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
§112
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 715 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 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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (US 2017/0365439 A1) in view of Tang et al. (US 2015/0078511 A1). With respect to claim 1, Takahashi et al. disclose an electric field emission device comprising: a vacuum vessel (11) configured to include a vacuum chamber (1); an emitter (3) that is positioned on one side in an axial direction of the vacuum chamber and includes an electron generation portion (31) facing an other side in the axial direction of the vacuum chamber; a target (7) that is positioned on the other side of the vacuum chamber and provided to face the emitter; a guard electrode (5) that is a cylindrical body provided on an outer peripheral side of the emitter, is fixed to the vacuum vessel on the one side, and has an opening portion on the other side; a support (4) configured to move the emitter in the axial direction on an inner side of the guard electrode (paragraphs 0034-0043). Takahashi et al. disclose all of the elements except for an electric field shield body that is formed of a conductor connected to the guard electrode and is disposed on one side of an edge portion of the guard electrode, wherein the electric field shield body is disposed so as to partially overlap the opening portion on a projection plane in the axial direction, and is formed in a shape partitioning the opening portion into a plurality of areas. Tang et al. disclose an electric field shield body (Fig. 2 - 103 &107) that is formed of a conductor connected to the guard electrode (104) and is disposed on one side of an edge portion of the guard electrode, wherein the electric field shield body is disposed so as to partially overlap the opening portion on a projection plane in the axial direction, and is formed in a shape partitioning the opening portion into a plurality of areas (Figs. 3A-3B & 4A-4B and paragraphs 0038-0044). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Takahashi et al. to include an electric field shield body that is formed of a conductor connected to the guard electrode and is disposed on one side of an edge portion of the guard electrode, wherein the electric field shield body is disposed so as to partially overlap the opening portion on a projection plane in the axial direction, and is formed in a shape partitioning the opening portion into a plurality of areas, to enable better focusing of the electron beam, as taught by Tang et al. With respect to claim 2, Takahashi et al./Tang et al. disclose wherein the electric field shield body (103 &107) is formed of one or more linear members fixed to an edge portion of the opening portion (Tang et al. - Figs. 3A-3B & 4A-4B). With respect to claim 3, Takahashi et al./Tang et al. disclose wherein the electric field shield body (103 &107) is formed of the linear members disposed in a lattice shape (Tang et al. - Figs. 3A-3B & 4A-4B). With respect to claim 4, Takahashi et al./Tang et al. disclose wherein the electric field shield body (103 &107) is formed in a plate shape having a plurality of through-holes (Tang et al. - Figs. 3A-3B & 4A-4B & paragraphs 0040+). With respect to claim 5, Takahashi et al./Tang et al. disclose wherein, when the emitter (3) moves to the other side and comes into contact with the guard electrode (5), the electric field shield body (103 & 107) partitions the electron generation portion (31) to form edges. With respect to claim 6, Takahashi et al./Tang et al. disclose wherein at least one surface of the emitter (102) or the support (104) is electrically insulating at a contact portion between the emitter and the support (Tang et al. - paragraph 0038). With respect to claim 7, Takahashi et al./Tang et al. do not specifically disclose wherein an axial height of the electric field shield body is formed to be lower than an axial height of the electron generation portion. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify Takahashi et al./Tang et al. to this configuration, as a matter of design choice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. With respect to claim 8, Takahashi et al./Tang et al. do not specifically disclose wherein the electric field shield body is formed integrally with the guard electrode. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify Takahashi et al./Tang et al. to have the electric field shield body be formed integrally with the guard electrode, as a matter of design choice. This would simplify assembly. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JURIE YUN whose telephone number is (571)272-2497. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30 am - 7:30 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, David J Makiya can be reached at 571 272-2273. 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. /JURIE YUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884 February 5, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 16, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601697
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PREDICTING THE PRESENCE OF RARE EARTH ELEMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597580
X-RAY GENERATING APPARATUS AND IMAGING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582842
TREATMENT ADAPTATION IN RADIOTHERAPY BASED ON INTRA-FRACTION DOSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582840
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR RADIATION TREATMENT PLANNING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578490
RECALIBRATION OF A RADIATION DETECTOR
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
87%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+10.8%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 715 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