Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 17, 2026
Application No. 18/804,048

DIFFRACTIVE OPTICAL WAVEGUIDE AND AR GLASSES

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Aug 14, 2024
Priority
Feb 14, 2022 — CN 202210134265.5 +1 more
Examiner
STAHL, MICHAEL J
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Zhuhai Mojie Technology Co. Ltd.
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
1152 granted / 1279 resolved
+30.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 12m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
1291
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
§102
41.3%
+1.3% vs TC avg
§112
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1279 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Objections Claim 17 is objected to because it includes reference number "20" which is not enclosed within parentheses. Reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description of the drawings and used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims should be enclosed within parentheses so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims. See MPEP § 608.01(m). Claim 21 is objected to because it recites "in a circular shape" instead of "has a circular shape"; "in a symmetric trapezoidal shape" instead of "has a symmetric trapezoidal shape"; and "in a rectangular shape" instead of "has a rectangular shape". Claim 30 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 29. See MPEP § 608.01(m). Claim 30 differs from claim 29 only in its preamble, which merely provides a different name for a device without reciting any additional structure. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claims 13-15, 18-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claims 13 and 14 are indefinite because it is not clear what shapes would qualify as being "trapezoidal-like" as recited in line 2 of claim 13 or line 3 of claim 14. Note MPEP 2173.05(b)(III)(C) and (E). Claim 14 is also indefinite because it is not clear what shapes would qualify as being "similar" to a circular shape or "similar" to a rectangle shape. Although the specification at [0050] provides respective lists of shapes which are presumably "similar" to a circular shape or a rectangular shape, both lists are preceded by "such as" and both lists include "and other regular or irregular shape", so they do not provide a clear boundary for claim 14. Claim 15 is indefinite by dependence from claim 14. Claims 18 and 19 are indefinite because it is not clear what shapes would qualify as being "isosceles-like" as recited in lines 6-7 of each claim. Claim 21 is indefinite because line 6 recites "both" but does not specify which two of the three shapes listed in lines 5-6 are included in "both". 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 1, 12, 15, 20, 25-26, and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 214474235 U (already made of record via information disclosure statement). Claim 1: '235 discloses a diffractive optical waveguide, comprising (see mainly figs. 3-4): an optical waveguide substrate 10, and at least one coupling-in region 11, at least one relay region 12, and at least one coupling-out region 13 disposed on the optical waveguide substrate; each relay region is arranged between the coupling-in region and the coupling-out region; a coupling-in grating 20, arranged in the coupling-in region, wherein the coupling-in grating is configured to couple lights into the optical waveguide substrate and transmit the lights to the relay region and the coupling-out region; the coupling-in grating is a one-dimensional grating or a two-dimensional grating; a relay grating 30, arranged in the relay region, wherein the relay grating is configured to change a transmission path of the lights so that the lights cover the coupling-out region; and a coupling-out grating 40, arranged in the coupling-out region, wherein the coupling-out grating is configured to couple lights out from the coupling-out region; the relay grating and the coupling-out grating are both two-dimensional gratings; the coupling-in region and the coupling-out region are both symmetrical in shape, the relay region is symmetrical or asymmetrical in shape. Claim 12: The coupling-in region 11 and the coupling-out region 13 both have an equivalent center, the equivalent center is a centroid position when a geometric shape is regarded as an object with uniform density; a line connecting the equivalent center of the coupling-in region and the equivalent center of the coupling-out region is a main line; a side of the relay region 12 close to the coupling-in region is perpendicular to the main line, an opposite side of the relay region close to the coupling-out region is perpendicular to the main line. Claim 15 (as best understood): The coupling-in region 11 and the coupling-out region 13 both have an equivalent center, the equivalent center is a centroid position when a geometric shape is regarded as an object with uniform density; a line connecting the equivalent center of the coupling-in region and the equivalent center of the coupling-out region is a main line; an angle between a direction of the main line and a horizontal direction ranges from 0 degrees to 90 degrees, an upper base of the relay region is close to the coupling-in region, and the upper base is perpendicular to the main line, and a lower base of the relay region is close to the coupling-out region, and the lower base is perpendicular to the main line, a straight-line distance between the upper base and the lower base of the relay region along the direction of the main line is defined as a height of the relay region, the height of the relay region is not less than a maximum distance of the coupling-in region along the main line. If the "horizontal direction" in '235 is taken as horizontally oriented in figs. 3-4, then the angle with respect to the main line is 0 degrees. If the "horizontal direction" in '235 is taken as vertically oriented in figs. 3-4, then the angle with respect to the main line is 90 degrees. Claim 20: The coupling-in region 11 and the coupling-out region 13 both have an equivalent center, the equivalent center is a centroid position when a geometric shape is regarded as an object with uniform density; a line connecting the equivalent center of the coupling-in region and the equivalent center of the coupling-out region is a main line; a direction of the main line of the diffractive optical waveguide corresponding to a left eye is defined as a left-eye main line direction, an angle between the left-eye main line direction and a horizontal direction ranges from 0 degrees to 90 degrees; a direction of the main line of the diffractive optical waveguide corresponding to a right eye is defined as a right-eye main line direction, an angle between the right-eye main line direction and a horizontal direction ranges from 90 degrees to 180 degrees (fig. 8). Claim 25: The coupling-in grating 20, the relay grating 30 and the coupling-out grating 40 are either a surface relief grating or a holographic grating ('235 discloses that all three can be surface relief gratings, and the coupling-out grating can alternatively be a holographic grating); wherein, the surface relief grating is one of a straight groove relief grating, a slant relief grating, a blazed relief grating, a step relief grating and a curved relief grating. Claim 26: The coupling-in region 11 comprises at least one first sub-region, the coupling-in grating is arranged on the at least one first sub-region; the relay region 12 comprises at least one second sub-region, the relay grating is arranged on the at least one second sub-region; the coupling-out region 13 comprises at least one third sub-region, and the coupling-out grating is arranged on the at least one third sub-region; a geometric boundary of the sub-regions is a straight edge or curved edge in any direction (curved edge for 11 and straight edges for 12 and 13). Claim 28: The coupling-in grating 20, the relay grating 30, the coupling-out grating 40 are positioned on one or both sides of the optical waveguide substrate, or inside the optical waveguide substrate; the diffractive optical waveguide is configured with one or more layers of optical waveguide substrates (one as disclosed); when the diffractive optical waveguide has multi-layer optical waveguide substrates, each layer of optical waveguide substrate is configured with a grating. Claim 29: '235 discloses an augmented reality glasses, comprising (see figs. 3-4 and 8): an optical machine 71, and a diffractive optical waveguide 1 according to claim 1; wherein, the optical machine is configured to emit signal lights towards the diffractive optical waveguide, the diffractive optical waveguide couples the signal lights into the optical waveguide substrate and couples out the signal lights to human eyes. Claim 30: '235 discloses a display device, comprising (see figs. 3-4 and 8): an optical machine 71, and a diffractive optical waveguide 1 according to claim 1; wherein, the optical machine is configured to emit signal lights towards the diffractive optical waveguide, the diffractive optical waveguide couples the signal lights into the optical waveguide substrate and couples out the signal lights to human eyes. Claims 1, 14, 22, 26, and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 113721320 A (already made of record via information disclosure statement). Any paragraph numbers mentioned below are those of the EPO machine translation cited on the attached 892 form). Claim 1: '320 discloses a diffractive optical waveguide, comprising (see mainly fig. 1): an optical waveguide substrate ("optical waveguide sheet"), and at least one coupling-in region, at least one relay region, and at least one coupling-out region disposed on the optical waveguide substrate; each relay region is arranged between the coupling-in region and the coupling-out region; a coupling-in grating 10, arranged in the coupling-in region, wherein the coupling-in grating is configured to couple lights into the optical waveguide substrate and transmit the lights to the relay region and the coupling-out region; the coupling-in grating is a one-dimensional grating or a two-dimensional grating; a relay grating 20, arranged in the relay region, wherein the relay grating is configured to change a transmission path of the lights so that the lights cover the coupling-out region; and a coupling-out grating 30, arranged in the coupling-out region, wherein the coupling-out grating is configured to couple lights out from the coupling-out region; the relay grating and the coupling-out grating are both two-dimensional gratings ([n0012], [n0052]); the coupling-in region and the coupling-out region are both symmetrical in shape, the relay region is symmetrical or asymmetrical in shape (see fig. 1). Claim 14 (as best understood): The coupling-in region is a circular shape Claim 22: The coupling-in region, the relay region, and the coupling-out region have different shapes (circular, trapezoidal, and rectangular respectively). Claim 26: The coupling-in region comprises at least one first sub-region, the coupling-in grating is arranged on the at least one first sub-region; the relay region comprises at least one second sub-region, the relay grating is arranged on the at least one second sub-region; the coupling-out region comprises at least one third sub-region, and the coupling-out grating is arranged on the at least one third sub-region; a geometric boundary of the sub-regions is a straight edge or curved edge in any direction (curved edge for 10 and straight edge for 20 and 30). Claim 28: The coupling-in grating 10, the relay grating 20, the coupling-out grating 30 are positioned on one or both sides of the optical waveguide substrate, or inside the optical waveguide substrate; the diffractive optical waveguide is configured with one or more layers of optical waveguide substrates (one as disclosed); when the diffractive optical waveguide has multi-layer optical waveguide substrates, each layer of optical waveguide substrate is configured with a grating. Claim 29: '320 discloses an augmented reality glasses, comprising: an optical machine ("light source component"), and a diffractive optical waveguide according to claim 1 (see [n0061]); wherein, the optical machine is configured to emit signal lights towards the diffractive optical waveguide, the diffractive optical waveguide couples the signal lights into the optical waveguide substrate and couples out the signal lights to human eyes. Claim 30: '320 discloses a display device, comprising: an optical machine ("light source component"), and a diffractive optical waveguide according to claim 1 (see [n0061]); wherein, the optical machine is configured to emit signal lights towards the diffractive optical waveguide, the diffractive optical waveguide couples the signal lights into the optical waveguide substrate and couples out the signal lights to human eyes. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 13, 16-19, 21, 23-24, and 27 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 base claim 1 and all applicable intervening claims (and for claims 13, 18-19, and 21, if the rewriting avoids the indefiniteness issues mentioned above). The applied references fail to disclose or suggest the additional geometric relationships or structural features required by those claims. Conclusion The additional references listed on the attached 892 form generally disclose other examples of waveguide devices. Contact Information Examiner: 571-272-2360 Examiner's direct supervisor: 571-272-2397 Official correspondence by fax: 571-273-8300 Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Should you have questions about Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /Michael Stahl/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 14, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12736751
APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR HIGH-SPEED AND LONG DEPTH RANGE IMAGING USING OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY
2y 3m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12730261
PILLAR STRUCTURES ON AN OPTICAL WAVEGUIDE
3y 11m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12724204
Photonic chip and infrared imaging system using such a photonic chip
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12724210
FIBER INSPECTION TOOL WITH MANUAL ADJUSTMENT
2y 3m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12717081
TEMPERATURE INSENSITIVE WAVEGUIDES AND ARRAY WAVEGUIDE GRATING MUX/DEMUX DEVICES
4y 3m to grant Granted Aug 25, 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 (+7.5%)
1y 12m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1279 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