Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/827,543

Material and System for Minimizing Light Refraction in Glass Crack Repair

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 06, 2024
Priority
Sep 06, 2023 — provisional 63/536,872
Examiner
GRACE, KELSEY C
Art Unit
1742
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
None recorded (individual inventor: Shiloh Spoo)
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
246 granted / 306 resolved
+15.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
321
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
60.9%
+20.9% vs TC avg
§102
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§112
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 306 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-10 in the reply filed on June 17, 2026 is acknowledged. Examiner would like Applicant to ensure the Remarks filed on June 17, 2026 are how Applicant expected because Examiner felt it may have been cookie cutter language that did not accurately respond to the Restriction sent April 17, 2026. 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. Claims 1-4 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campfield (US 8,268,104) in view of Syfko (US 2020/0230900). In reference to Claim 1, Campfield discloses a resin for glass repair (Abstract) (a resin material repairing defects in glass), comprising: a UV curable resin (Abstract) (a light-curable resin); injection of the UV resin (7:50-54) (said mixture of light curable resin and particulate forming a liquid solution for positioning into a resin injector for injection into a defect in glass). Campfield does not disclose particulate material mixed into said light curable resin to form a mixture of said light curable resin and said particulate disbursed therein, said mixture of said light curable resin and said particulate forming said liquid solution when positioned within said defect being curable by light communicated thereto to thereby form a solid solution of cured light-curable resin and particulate within said defect whereby said particulate in said solid solution blocks reflections of sunlight emanating from said defect. Syfko discloses photoinitiator particles within the resin ([0015]) (particulate material mixed into said light curable resin to form a mixture of said light curable resin and said particulate disbursed therein); when properly repaired the optical properties will match the glass being repaired ([0125]) (said mixture of said light curable resin and said particulate forming said liquid solution when positioned within said defect being curable by light communicated thereto to thereby form a solid solution of cured light-curable resin and particulate within said defect whereby said particulate in said solid solution blocks reflections of sunlight emanating from said defect). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to complete the material of Campfield using the particles of Syfko because the wavelength needed to cure the particles is within the UV range. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the particles of Syfko in the material of Campfield because a single wavelength to cure the particles and resin base speeds up the process. The reasonable expectation of success would be a repaired section of glass with the same optical properties as before the defect occurred. In reference to Claim 2, modified Campfield discloses the material of Claim 1, as described above. Syfko discloses a portion of the resin is isobornyl acrylate ([0075]-[0097]) (light-curable resin is one or a combination of light-curable resins, from a group of light-curable resins including, Benzyl Methacrylate, 2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate, Octyl Acrylate, Decyl Acrylate, Acrylic Acid, and Isobornyl Acrylate). In reference to Claim 3, modified Campfield discloses the material of Claim 1, as described above. Syfko discloses the particles being activated by the exposure to light ([0015) (particulate is formed of a particulate material which will not dissolve within the light curable-resin into which they are mixed). In reference to Claim 4, modified Campfield discloses the material of Claim 2, as described above. Syfko discloses the particles being activated by the exposure to light ([0015) (particulate is formed of a particulate material which will not dissolve within the light curable-resin into which they are mixed). In reference to Claim 7, modified Campfield discloses the material of Claim 3, as described above. Syfko discloses photoinitiator particles from 1-10% ([0059]-[0069]) (particulate material within said mixture of said light curable resin and said particulate material is at a ratio of .04 to 20% of particulate material by total volume of the mixture of light-curable resin and particulate material). In reference to Claim 8, modified Campfield discloses the material of Claim 4, as described above. Syfko discloses photoinitiator particles from 1-10% ([0059]-[0069]) (particulate material within said mixture of said light curable resin and said particulate material is at a ratio of .04 to 20% of particulate material by total volume of the mixture of light-curable resin and particulate material). Claims 5-6 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campfield (US 8,268,104) in view of Syfko (US 2020/0230900) as applied to Claims 1-4 above, and further in view of Koep, et al. (US 2019/0308904). In reference to Claim 5, modified Campfield discloses the material of Claim 3, as described above. Modified Campfield does not disclose particulate material is one or a combination of particulate materials from a group of particulate materials including graphene, carbon, carbon black, graphite, and ceramics. Koep discloses an acrylate based resin with carbon nanoparticles ([0049]) (particulate material is one or a combination of particulate materials from a group of particulate materials including graphene, carbon, carbon black, graphite, and ceramics). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to complete the material of modified Campfield using the particles of Koep because the carbon nanoparticles strengthen the resin. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the particles of Koep in the material of modified Campfield because the strength improves the repair. The reasonable expectation of success would be a repaired section of glass with a strong resin. In reference to Claim 6, modified Campfield discloses the material of Claim 4, as described above. Modified Campfield does not disclose particulate material is one or a combination of particulate materials from a group of particulate materials including graphene, carbon, carbon black, graphite, and ceramics. Koep discloses an acrylate based resin with carbon nanoparticles ([0049]) (particulate material is one or a combination of particulate materials from a group of particulate materials including graphene, carbon, carbon black, graphite, and ceramics). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to complete the material of modified Campfield using the particles of Koep because the carbon nanoparticles strengthen the resin. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the particles of Koep in the material of modified Campfield because the strength improves the repair. The reasonable expectation of success would be a repaired section of glass with a strong resin. In reference to Claim 9, modified Campfield discloses the material of Claim 5, as described above. Syfko discloses photoinitiator particles from 1-10% ([0059]-[0069]) (particulate material within said mixture of said light curable resin and said particulate material is at a ratio of .04 to 20% of particulate material by total volume of the mixture of light-curable resin and particulate material). In reference to Claim 10, modified Campfield discloses the material of Claim 6, as described above. Syfko discloses photoinitiator particles from 1-10% ([0059]-[0069]) (particulate material within said mixture of said light curable resin and said particulate material is at a ratio of .04 to 20% of particulate material by total volume of the mixture of light-curable resin and particulate material). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELSEY C GRACE whose telephone number is (571)270-1113. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST, Friday 7:00 AM - 11:00 AM 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, Christina Johnson can be reached at (571)272-1176. 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. KELSEY C. GRACE Examiner Art Unit 1742 /CHRISTINA A JOHNSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 06, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12759218
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, IMPRINTING DEVICE, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND ARTICLE MANUFACTURING METHOD
3y 9m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12752377
METHOD FOR PRODUCING A METAL-CERAMIC SUBSTRATE, AND METAL-CERAMIC SUBSTRATE PRODUCED USING A METHOD OF THIS TYPE
3y 8m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12746725
OPTICS IN THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTING
3y 2m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12654356
Integrated Additive Manufacturing and Laser Processing Systems and Methods for Ceramic, Glass, and Silicon Carbide Applications
1y 12m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12648859
IMPLANT FUSION DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING
2y 11m to grant Granted Jun 09, 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
80%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+11.9%)
3y 0m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 306 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