Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/855,082

SPECTROMETRY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 08, 2024
Examiner
XING, CHRISTINA ILONA
Art Unit
2877
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Hamamatsu Photonics K K
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
21 granted / 24 resolved
+19.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
55
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
49.3%
+9.3% vs TC avg
§102
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
§112
14.2%
-25.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 24 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sano et al. (US Pub 2012/0075628 A1)(hereinafter, “Sano”). Regarding claim 1, Sano teaches a spectroscopic measurement device (1) comprising: a light entrance portion allowing light to be measured to be incident thereon (discloses light reception portion 6 receives light from the object, [0159]); a reflective diffraction grating configured to disperse the light to be measured incident from the light entrance portion(discloses spectrometer 24 disperses incoming light into a spectral image, [0122]); an optical detector (25) configured to detect the light to be measured dispersed by the reflective diffraction grating (discloses the photodetector 25 captures the dispersed light, [0122]); a lens (lens inside spectrometer 24, [0100-0101]) configured to guide the light to be measured incident from the light entrance portion (light reception portion 6, [0159]) to the reflective diffraction grating (spectrometer 24) and to form a spectral image (discloses a spectrometer 24 that splits light and causes it to fall on photodetector 25, the lens structure is implicit inside the spectrometer, [0122]) of the light to be measured dispersed by the reflective diffraction grating on a light receiving region of the optical detector (detection area 25a, “on the detection surface of photodetector 25, the area where light split by spectrometer 24 is incident (detection area 25a)”, [0122]); and an analyzer (100/100A) configured to generate spectral data of the light to be measured (processing device 100/100A generates spectral data, [0163]), wherein: the light receiving region (detection area 25a), [0122]) includes: a first light receiving region (detection area 25a), [0122]) including a plurality of first light detection channels arranged in a direction parallel to a wavelength axis of the spectral image (discloses N partitioned areas (1ch…Nch), [0101]); and a second light receiving region (correction area 25b, [0122]) arranged side by side with the first light receiving region in a direction perpendicular to the wavelength axis (discloses at least four partitioned areas (Ach, Bch, Cch, Dch), [0101]), and including a plurality of second light detection channels arranged in the direction parallel to the wavelength axis (discloses wavelength-resolved channels inherently correspond to spectral axis arrangement, [0101]), the optical detector (25) outputs first spectral data of the light to be measured by receiving the spectral image in a first exposure time (discloses photodetector 25 has configurable exposure time, detector output amplitude depends on exposure time, [0146]) in the first light receiving region (detection area 25a), [0122], “the amplitude (signal intensity) of the correction dark spectrum fluctuates depending on the exposure time”, [0146]), and outputs second spectral data of the light to be measured by receiving the spectral image in a second exposure time longer than the first exposure time (“measurement results…when the exposure time was set to 200 msec and 2000 msec”, [0139]) in the second light receiving region (correction area 25b, [0122]), the analyzer (100/100A) generates the spectral data based on the first spectral data (processing device 100/100A generates spectral data, [0163]) and the second spectral data output from the optical detector(discloses that the photodetector output changes with exposure time, inherently provide two spectral outputs, [0140]), and the optical detector (25) is disposed so that a stray light region(correction area 25b, [0122]), in which stray light generated in an optical path from the light entrance portion to the optical detector gathers(discloses stray light component captured by correction area 25b, [0123]), is located in the first light receiving region (discloses the system is arranged so that stray light hits correction area 25b, separate from the main detection area 25a, [0123]). Regarding claim 2, Sano teaches wherein the analyzer generates the spectral data based on data in a wavelength band not including a wavelength band corresponding to the stray light region in the first spectral data and data in a wavelength band including the wavelength band corresponding to the stray light region in the second spectral data (discloses the collection area 25b collects stray light components separately from the main detection area 25a, the processing device 100A calculates the correction value ΔM from this correction area and subtracts it from the main measurement spectrum, inherently uses a stray light reference to correct measured spectrum, [0123]). Regarding claim 3, Sano teaches wherein the optical detector (25) is offset to one side in the direction perpendicular to the wavelength axis with respect to the light entrance portion (discloses the photodetector 25 has detection area 25a and correction area 25b arranged side by side, [0160]). Regarding claim 4, Sano teaches wherein the stray light is generated by multiple reflections of a part of the light to be measured inside the lens (discloses a correction area 25b and the use of a correction value ΔM to compensate for unwanted signals in the photodetector, inherently disclosed stray light correction, [0123] and [0146]). Regarding claim 5, Sano teaches further comprising a mask member disposed between the lens and the optical detector and configured to block the stray light (discloses uses correction area 25b and subtracting processing to remove stray light effects, [0123] and [0146]). 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. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano et al. (US Pub 2012/0075628 A1)(hereinafter, “Sano”) in view of Warren ( US Pub 2009/0237657 A1). Regarding claim 6, Sano fails to disclose wherein the lens is a convex lens having a surface facing the light entrance portion and the optical detector, and a convex surface facing the reflective diffraction grating. Warren teaches wherein the lens is a convex lens (110) having a surface facing the light entrance portion and the optical detector (discloses lens rear surface faces the slit and directs light toward the detector, [0039-0040]), and a convex surface facing the reflective diffraction grating (discloses lens front surface is convex and faces the diffraction grating, [0039]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to integrate a convex lens of Warren to Sano to enhance the accuracy of spectral images on the detector, reduce stray light and back reflections, improve measurement precision across the spectral range, and increase optical throughput ([0040-0042]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA XING whose telephone number is (571)270-7743. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9AM - 5 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, Kara Geisel can be reached at 571-272-2416. 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. /CHRISTINA I XING/ Examiner, Art Unit 2877 /Kara E. Geisel/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 08, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601690
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GRADING CLARITY OF GEMSTONES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596074
CAMERA SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12572112
OPTICAL MEASUREMENT SYSTEM AND OPTICAL MEASUREMENT METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574121
A SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TIME SYNCHRONISATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571728
METHOD FOR DETECTING A LIQUID COMPOSITION APPLIED ONTO A CELLULOSE BLANK STRUCTURE WITH A DETECTION SYSTEM AND A DETECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+8.3%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 24 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