Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 18/988,713

SYSTEM FOR DISTRIBUTING QUANTUM KEYS USING CORRECTION OF THE POLARIZATION OF PHOTONS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 19, 2024
Priority
Dec 21, 2023 — FR 2314815
Examiner
VANDERPUYE, KENNETH N
Art Unit
2634
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Thales Group
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
24%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 7m
Est. Remaining
24%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 24% of cases
24%
Career Allowance Rate
16 granted / 67 resolved
-38.1% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
88
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.9%
-36.1% vs TC avg
§103
53.9%
+13.9% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 67 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. With regards to claim 1, lines 11-12 discloses “a first signal, ” and “a second signal” and in lines 24 and 26 the claim discloses “said first control signal” and in line 26 “said second control signal”. This creates a lack of antecedent basis. With regards to claim 4, lines 3-4 discloses “a first signal, ” and “a second signal” and in line 7 the claim discloses “said first control signal” and “said second control signal”. This creates a lack of antecedent basis. With regards to claim 5, lines 3 discloses “said control signal-components” .This creates a lack of antecedent basis. With regards to claim 8, lines 5-6 discloses “a first signal, ” and “a second signal” and in line 9 the claim discloses “said first control signal” and “said second control signal”. This creates a lack of antecedent basis. With regards to claim 10, lines 5-6 the claim discloses “said first control signal” and “said second control signal”. This creates a lack of antecedent basis. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH N VANDERPUYE whose telephone number is (571)272-3078. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:30am-2:30p. 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. 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. /KENNETH N VANDERPUYE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 19, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 31, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12744595
OPTICAL TRANSMISSION LINE MONITORING DEVICE AND OPTICAL TRANSMISSION LINE MONITORING METHOD
2y 0m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12720239
WAVELENGTH CROSS CONNECT DEVICE, AND WAVELENGTH CROSS CONNECT METHOD
2y 8m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12706667
METHOD FOR DETERMINING PERFORMANCE INDICATOR, DEVICE AND COMPUTER STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12683686
SINGLE-FIBER BIDIRECTIONAL OPTICAL ASSEMBLY
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12659043
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR COMPENSATING PERFORMANCE OF TRANSMITTER IN OPTICAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 2m 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
24%
Grant Probability
24%
With Interview (+0.0%)
3y 4m (~1y 7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 67 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