Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/772,261

COMMUNICATION DEVICE AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 15, 2024
Priority
Aug 31, 2023 — JP 2023-140697
Examiner
RAHLL, JERRY T
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
NEC Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allowance Rate
1122 granted / 1250 resolved
+29.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
1271
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
73.1%
+33.1% vs TC avg
§102
21.3%
-18.7% vs TC avg
§112
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1250 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
CTNF 18/772,261 CTNF 78581 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 15 July 2024 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the examiner has considered the information disclosure statement; please see attached forms PTO-1449. Drawings The drawings submitted have been reviewed and determined to facilitate understanding of the invention. The drawings are accepted as submitted. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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 1 and 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated US Patent No. 6,229,500 B1 to Caille et al. (“US1”). Regarding Claim 1, US1 describes a communication device (see Figs 5-12) comprising: a ball lens (21); a transceiver (23, 24) in which a light receiver having a light reception axis passing through a center of the ball lens and a light transmitter having a light transmission axis parallel to the light reception axis are integrated (see Col 7 Lns 7-53); and a rotation mechanism (30, 31, 32, 33; 70, 71, 72, 73) that rotatably supports the transceiver along a circular orbit in a horizontal plane and a vertical plane centered on the ball lens. Regarding Claim 2, US1 describes the rotation mechanism including: a horizontal rotation mechanism (32, 33; 70, 73) that moves the transceiver along a circular orbit in the horizontal plane centered on the ball lens; and a vertical rotation mechanism (30, 31; 71, 72) that moves the transceiver along a circular orbit in the vertical plane centered on the ball lens. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US1 as applied to Claim 1 above . US1 describes a communication system comprising the communication device of Claim 1 (see Fig 3). US1 does not describe the system comprising a plurality of the communication disposed to transmit and receive spatial optical signals to and from each other. However, using the same transceiving communication devices to communicate with each other in an optical system is well-known in the art. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form an optical system comprising a plurality of communication devices of US1, wherein a plurality of the communication devices are disposed to transmit and receive spatial optical signals to and from each other. The motivation for doing so would have been to create a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 3-9 are 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. Claims 3-6 describe a substrate having a light receiving surface directed to the ball lens and a back surface opposed to the light receiving surface, the substrate having a through hole penetrating the light receiving surface and the back surface; and a plurality of direction detecting light receiving elements disposed around the through hole on the light receiving surface of the substrate with a light receiving part facing the ball lens. Claims 7-9 describe a plurality of the transceivers whose transmission and reception optical axes are directed in mutually different azimuths are disposed on concentric circles in a horizontal plane. These limitations represent subject matter not described or reasonably suggested, in conjunction with the further limitations of the present claims, by the prior art of record. Conclusion The prior art cited in the attached form PTO-892 are made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY RAHLL whose telephone number is (571)272-2356. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:00pm. 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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at 571-272-2397. 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. /JERRY RAHLL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/772,261 Page 2 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/772,261 Page 3 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/772,261 Page 4 Art Unit: 2874
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 15, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12681243
THERMAL STRUCTURE FOR A MICRO-RING RESONATOR (MRR) IN A PHOTONIC INTEGRATED CIRCUIT (PIC)
4y 2m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12681238
CONFIGURABLE OPTICAL DEVICES HAVING AN OPTICAL SPLITTER AND DUPLEX CONNECTOR
3y 2m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12681245
Direct Silicon-to-Silicon Bonding for Fiber-First Packaging Process
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12674937
EFFICIENT PHOTONIC COUPLERS FOR PHOTONIC WAVEGUIDES AND METHODS OF FORMING THE SAME
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12674943
MULTI-FIBER OPTICAL CONNECTOR FERRULE AND OPTICAL MODULE
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+8.4%)
2y 0m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1250 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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