Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/745,833

Radioabsorbent Assemblies

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 17, 2024
Examiner
CHANG, HANWAY
Art Unit
2878
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Egg Medical Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
538 granted / 626 resolved
+17.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
65 currently pending
Career history
691
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
§102
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
§112
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 626 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Terminal Disclaimer The Terminal Disclaimer filed 6/05/2025 has been reviewed and accepted. However, upon further consideration, the claims are rejected as produced below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 2-10, 13-15, 17-18, 23-24, 26-27, 30, 32, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Heesch (US Pat. 6,325,538, hereinafter Heesch). Regarding claim 2, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses a first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) configured to be positioned parallel to a longitudinal axis of the patient platform (table 14) (see col. 7, lines 30-54); and a second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) configured to be positioned transverse to the longitudinal axis of the patient platform (table 14) (see col. 7, lines 30-54); and wherein the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) is adjustable between a plurality of positions with respect the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 3, Heesch discloses the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is adjustable between a plurality of positions with respect to the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 4, Heesch discloses in a first position, the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is perpendicular to the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) (see col. 7, lines 30-54). Regarding claim 5, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses in a second position, the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is parallel to the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) (see col. 7, lines 30-54). Regarding claim 6, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is comprised of a first vertically oriented rectangular panel (lateral wall 56) (see col. 7, lines 30-54). Regarding claim 7, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) is comprised of a second vertically oriented rectangular panel (later wall 56) (see col. 7, lines 30-54). Regarding claim 8, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is vertically adjustable with respect to the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 9, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) is vertically adjustable to with respect to the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 10, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses a bottom edge of the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is positioned at a height equal to or greater than an upper surface of the patient platform (table 14) (see Fig. 3). Regarding claim 13, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) is attached to a free-standing mechanism (vertical support section 22) (see col. 6, lines 52-57). Regarding claim 14, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses at least a portion of a lower edge of the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) is elevated with respect to an upper surface of the patient platform (table 14) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 15, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is configured to be positioned along a side of a patient (see Fig. 3). Regarding claim 17, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses a patient platform (table 14); a first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) positioned parallel to a longitudinal axis of the patient platform (table 14); and a second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) positioned transverse to the longitudinal axis of the patient platform (table 14) (see col. 7, lines 30-54); and wherein the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) is adjustable between a plurality of positions with respect to the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 18, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses a first position, the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is perpendicular to the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) (see Fig. 3). Regarding claim 23, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) is vertically adjustable with respect to the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 24, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses a bottom edge of the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is positioned at a height equal to or greater than an upper surface of the patient platform (table 14) (see Fig. 3). Regarding claim 26, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is attached to a patient platform (table 14) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 27, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) is attached to a patient platform (table 14) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 30, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses at least a portion of a lower edge of the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) is elevated with respect to an upper surface of the patient platform (table 14) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 32, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses adjusting a height of the second radiation shield (lower shield section 53) with respect to the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) (see col. 8, lines 8-22). Regarding claim 34, Fig. 3 of Heesch discloses a bottom edge of the first radiation shield (upper shield section 52) is positioned at a height equal to or greater than an upper surface of a patient platform (table 14) (see Fig. 3). 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 12, 28, 29, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heesch. Regarding claim 12, while Heesch does not disclose the second radiation shield is attached to a ceiling mount, Heesch teaches the shielding members (upper and lower 52, 53) are connected to a vertical support 22 (see col. 6, lines 52-65). Heesch further teaches that the shield sections 52, 53 can be adapted to vary the positions of the various shield segments (see col. 8, lines 8-22) in relation to each other and the table 14. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to secure the support system in any desired location (i.e. ceiling, wall, floor) for stabilization, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Regarding claim 28, while Heesch does not disclose the second radiation shield is attached to a ceiling mount, Heesch teaches the shielding members (upper and lower 52, 53) are connected to a vertical support 22 (see col. 6, lines 52-65). Heesch further teaches that the shield sections 52, 53 can be adapted to vary the positions of the various shield segments (see col. 8, lines 8-22) in relation to each other and the table 14. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to secure the support system in any desired location (i.e. ceiling, wall, floor) for stabilization, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Regarding claim 29, while Heesch does not disclose the second radiation shield is attached to a wall mount, Heesch teaches the shielding members (upper and lower 52, 53) are connected to a vertical support 22 (see col. 6, lines 52-65). Heesch further teaches that the shield sections 52, 53 can be adapted to vary the positions of the various shield segments (see col. 8, lines 8-22) in relation to each other and the table 14. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to secure the support system in any desired location (i.e. ceiling, wall, floor) for stabilization, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Regarding claim 33, while Heesch does not disclose the second radiation shield is attached to a ceiling mount, Heesch teaches the shielding members (upper and lower 52, 53) are connected to a vertical support 22 (see col. 6, lines 52-65). Heesch further teaches that the shield sections 52, 53 can be adapted to vary the positions of the various shield segments (see col. 8, lines 8-22) in relation to each other and the table 14. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to secure the support system in any desired location (i.e. ceiling, wall, floor) for stabilization, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11, 16, 19-21, 22, 25, 31, and 35 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: The prior art of record, either singularly or in combination, does not disclose the bottom edge of the second radiation shield is positioned at a height equal to or greater than an upper surface of the patient platform. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANWAY CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5766. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM EST. 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, Robert Kim can be reached at (571)272-2293. 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. Hanway Chang /HC/ Examiner, Art Unit 2881 /WYATT A STOFFA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 17, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
May 28, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 10, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 10, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 18, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 18, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597582
Charged Particle Beam Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12557588
METHODS OF CROSS-SECTION IMAGING OF AN INSPECTION VOLUME IN A WAFER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12520413
SAPPHIRE LAMP FOR LASER SUSTAINED PLASMA BROADBAND LIGHT SOURCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12476073
SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPE IMAGE-BASED PITCH WALK INSPECTION METHOD AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE COMPRISING THE INSPECTION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12463003
HIGH TEMPERATURE ION SOURCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 04, 2025
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+7.6%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 626 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