Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/951,058

CORNEAL LENTICULAR INCISION USING A FEMTOSECOND LASER WITH OPTIMIZED PULSE ENERGY AND SCAN LINE STEPS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Nov 18, 2024
Priority
Nov 30, 2021 — continuation of 12/150,900
Examiner
CHRISTIANSON, SKYLAR LINDSEY
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
AMO Development LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 3m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allowance Rate
88 granted / 150 resolved
-1.3% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
202
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.6%
-36.4% vs TC avg
§103
78.3%
+38.3% vs TC avg
§102
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
§112
3.1%
-36.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 150 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. 1. Claims 19-22 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12150900 B2 in view of Dussan (US 20170242103 A1). US 12150900 B2 discloses the claim expect for wherein there is a prism disposed to receive scanned pulsed laser beam from the high frequency scanner, configured to rotate an orientation of the scan line. However, Dussan teaches a scanning laser system (Abstract) wherein there is a prism that receives the light pulses from the scanning mirrors (Claim 5; The configured to language is considered intended use – Since Dussan teaches the same structure as the Applicants prism, it would be capable of rotating an orientation of the scan line) in order to reflect the pulse in a new direction (Par. 0057). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have taken the teachings of US 12150900 B2 and modified them by adding a prism, as taught and suggested by Dussan, in order to reflect the pulse in a new direction (Par. 0057 of Dussan). 2. Claims 23-26 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12150900 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the disclose the same subject matter. Allowable Subject Matter 3. Claims 19-26 do not currently have a prior art rejection applied. The contain subject matter that is not found in the art. For example, the combination of all of the limitations, specifically a controller configured to control all the claimed elements to form the claimed scan pattern, is not found in the art. The scan line step being between 1.7-2.3 microns in order to avoid spoke wheel marks is also novel. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SKYLAR LINDSEY CHRISTIANSON whose telephone number is (571)272-0533. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30-5:30 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, Niketa Patel can be reached at (571) 272-4156. 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. /S.L.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3792 /LYNSEY C Eiseman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 18, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12661068
A SYSTEM FOR DENOISING MOTION ARTIFACT SIGNALS AND METHOD THEREOF
4y 4m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12661512
NEUROSTIMULATION USING ONE OR MORE CYCLING PARAMETERS FOR A NON-PARESTHESIA STIMULATION PATTERN
2y 2m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12642699
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LASER TREATMENT OF OCULAR TISSUE USING NON-COLLINEAR IMAGING
3y 9m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12539049
DEVICE FOR MONITORING BLOOD FLOW
2y 2m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12527970
PHOTOBIOMODULATION DEVICE FOR TREATING RETINAL DISEASE
5y 7m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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
59%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+28.8%)
2y 11m (~1y 3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 150 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