Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/811,017

IN SITU POLYMER COATING REFRACTIVE INDEX MODIFICATION

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Aug 21, 2024
Priority
May 29, 2024 — provisional 63/653,060
Examiner
FRANKLIN, JODI COHEN
Art Unit
1741
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Lumentum Operations LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 4m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allowance Rate
460 granted / 751 resolved
-3.7% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
809
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
90.0%
+50.0% vs TC avg
§102
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§112
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 751 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 04/24/2026 is acknowledged. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ding (CN 116184561). Regarding claims 1-3, 8 and 13-14, Ding discloses a method of manufacturing an optical fiber (title), the method comprising: drawing a glass fiber from a glass preform (2) (Fig. 3) that is arranged in a glass furnace (3) (Fig. 3); drawing the glass fiber (5) out of the glass furnace (Fig. 3) applying a fiber coating (503) to the glass fiber; page 8, paragraph (4-5) Ding discloses coating the fiber with a fluorine dopant that modifies refractive index (page 7, paragraph 4) the coating having an acrylic base material with a fluorine as a dopant where the fluorine diffuses throughout the base material given the broadest reasonable interpretation Page 6-7 indicates 502-503 being acrylic ester can be light curing coating, comprising a fluorine-containing acrylic ester monomer and other acrylic ester silicone polyimide polymers comprising fluorine and repeats throughout the translation doping fluorine into the coating or layer on the fiber (see at least claim 7) and Ding states a coating can be one or multiple layers (last paragraph of page 5). Ding discloses light curing an acrylic thus UV cured at least partially. Thus applying one or more dopants to a base material of the fiber coating to modify a refractive index of the fiber coating. Regarding claim 4, Ding also suggests the coating comprising chrolrosilane, or chlorine, (page 6; second to last paragraph) Regarding claim 5, Ding discloses the one or more dopants include at least one of fluorine to decrease the refractive index of the fiber coating (Fig. 2). Regarding claim 7, Ding discloses applying the one or more dopants to the base material of the fiber coating includes mixing the base material with a dopant medium of the one or more dopants to produce a doped base material see claim 1. Ding discloses applying the fiber coating to the glass fiber includes applying, by a coating machine (601) or applicator, the doped base material to the glass fiber to form a coated glass fiber (Fig 1 and 3). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6, 9-12 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. The prior art does not indicate dopants that include at least one of sulfur hexafluoride, silicon tetrafluoride, or titanium tetrachloride in addition to the limitations of claim 1 requiring steps specifically on a glass fiber. Regarding claims 9 and 11-12 the prior art does not disclose applying the fiber coating to the glass fiber includes applying, by a coating applicator, the base material to the glass fiber to form a coated glass fiber. Therefore the coating being a base material on the fiber and applying the one or more dopants to the base material of the fiber coating includes exposing the coated glass fiber to a gaseous dopant medium such that the one or more dopants diffuse into the base material of the fiber coating of the coated glass fiber and a secondary coating and doping and curing. Claim 10 is objected to but allowed at least for including all of the limitation of claim 9 and claims 9 depends from. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JODI COHEN FRANKLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3966. 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, Alison Hindelang can be reached at (571) 270-7001. 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. JODI COHEN FRANKLIN Primary Examiner Art Unit 1741 /JODI C FRANKLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 21, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12679755
Selective Chemical Fining of Small Bubbles in Glass
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12662410
APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR SEPARATING EDGE PORTIONS FROM A GLASS RIBBON
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12655053
FORMING APPARATUS OF CURVED DISPLAY PANEL, FORMING METHOD THEREOF, AND CURVED DISPLAY PANEL
3y 3m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12653330
METHOD FOR IMPROVING BEHAVIOUR OF A MUSEUM DISPLAY CASE WITH RESPECT TO OBJECTS EXHIBITED THEREIN
4y 2m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12655052
MELTING FURNACES AND CHARGING OF MELTING FURNACES
3y 11m to grant Granted Jun 16, 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
61%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+25.2%)
3y 3m (~1y 4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 751 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