Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/714,640

DIGITAL EXPOSURE SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 30, 2024
Examiner
ASFAW, MESFIN T
Art Unit
2882
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Korea Institute Of Machinery & Materials
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
794 granted / 961 resolved
+14.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
994
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.6%
+13.6% vs TC avg
§102
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
§112
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 961 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 . 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shinada [US 20010043317 A1]. As per Claim 1, Shinada teaches a digital exposure system (See fig. 1, Para 34, an image recording apparatus 10) comprising: a light source 12 that radiates light onto a substrate (photosensitive medium S); a digital mirror device (an optical modulator 16) that forms a two-dimensional pattern image by selectively transmitting light emitted from the light source; an optical system that modulates the two-dimensional pattern image into a one-dimensional pattern image (Para 42, forming a single main scanning line 36 thereon); and a substrate scanner that adjusts the position of the substrate to continuously project the one-dimensional pattern image onto a photosensitive layer on the substrate for scan exposure (Para 42, the photosensitive medium S is fed in the auxiliary scanning direction Y), wherein the two-dimensional pattern image has a uniform image in a direction parallel with a scan direction for the substrate and has an image of a target pattern in a direction (X direction) perpendicular to the scan direction (Y direction) for the substrate (See fig. 1, Para 42, a two-dimensional image is recorded on the photosensitive medium S). 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. Claim(s) 2-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shinada as applied above, in view of Maeda [US 20130050669 A1]. As per Claim 2, Shinada teaches the digital exposure system of claim 1, wherein: the optical system includes the following: a cylindrical lens 18 that is positioned between the projection lenses (not shown) and the substrate (See fig. 1, Para 41). Shinada does not explicitly teach a plurality of projection lenses. Maeda teaches anamorphic optical system 130J includes a field lens 132J, a cross-process optical subsystem 133J and a process optical subsystem 137J (See fig. 11-12, Para 73). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the optical elements as disclosed by Maeda in the exposure system of Shinada in order to accurately image modulated light field onto imaging surface. As per Claim 3, Shinada in view of Maeda teaches the digital exposure system of claim 2. Shinada further disclosed (See imaging beam between the optical modulator 16 and the cylindrical lens 18) wherein: the two-dimensional pattern image is focused in the direction parallel with the scan direction for the substrate, imaged in the direction perpendicular to the scan direction for the substrate, and modulated into the one-dimensional pattern image (See fig. 1, wherein imaging is in the X direction while scanning is in the Y direction). As per Claims 4 and 5, Shinada in view of Maeda teaches the digital exposure system of claim 3. Maeda further disclosed a diffraction compensator that is installed in the optical system to compensate for light which is diffracted in the scan direction for the substrate (Para 73, wherein an aperture Y-stop between doublet lens elements). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the aperture stop as disclosed by Maeda in the exposure system of Shinada in order to transmit a desired beam only. As per Claim 6, Shinada in view of Maeda teaches the digital exposure system of claim 5. Maeda further disclosed wherein: the diffraction compensator is installed so as to correspond to a focusing point between the plurality of projection lenses on which the light is focused (See fig. 11, Para 73, Y-STOP). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the aperture stop as disclosed by Maeda in the exposure system of Shinada in order to transmit a desired beam only. As per Claim 7, Shinada in view of Maeda teaches the digital exposure system of claim 4. Maeda further disclosed wherein: the diffraction compensator (Y-STOP) includes a slit or an iris (See fig. 11, Para 73). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the aperture stop as disclosed by Maeda in the exposure system of Shinada in order to transmit a desired beam only. As per Claim 8, Shinada in view of Maeda teaches the digital exposure system of claim 4. Maeda further disclosed wherein: a focusing direction in which the two-dimensional pattern image is focused and the scan direction for the substrate have a first inclination angle larger than 0° and smaller than 45° (See fig. 11, Para 73, wherein the beam is converging to focal point at the Y-STOP). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention was made to incorporate the aperture stop as disclosed by Maeda in the exposure system of Shinada in order to transmit a desired beam only. As per Claims 9 and 10, Shinada in view of Maeda teaches the digital exposure system of claim 8. Shinada further disclosed wherein: the digital mirror device includes a plurality of pixel mirrors which rotates on a pixel rotation axis, and the focusing direction in which the two-dimensional pattern image is focused and the pixel rotation axis are parallel with each other (See fig. 1 and 6, Para 36). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MESFIN ASFAW whose telephone number is (571)270-5247. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4 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, Toan Ton can be reached at 571-272-2303. 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. /MESFIN T ASFAW/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 30, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 27, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601981
RETICLE STORAGE POD AND METHOD FOR SECURING RETICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596308
MODULAR WAFER TABLE AND METHODS OF MANUFACTURING THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585194
METHOD AND SWAPPING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578656
EUV LIGHT GENERATION APPARATUS AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE MANUFACTURING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578658
SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND DEVICES FOR THERMAL CONDITIONING OF RETICLES IN LITHOGRAPHIC APPARATUSES
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
83%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+14.2%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 961 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