Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/238,928

TOUCH SCREEN SENSOR

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jun 16, 2025
Examiner
SASINOWSKI, ANDREW
Art Unit
2625
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
3M Company
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
664 granted / 855 resolved
+15.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
9 currently pending
Career history
864
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.0%
-36.0% vs TC avg
§103
43.6%
+3.6% vs TC avg
§102
35.7%
-4.3% vs TC avg
§112
9.8%
-30.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 855 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. 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. Claims 1, 9-11 and 13-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3 and 5-9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,093,490. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they each recite substantially similar claim language. Present claim 1 and claim 1 of patent 12,093,490 are compared below: Present claim 1 Claim 1 of 12,093,490 An electrically conductive micropattern patterned to define a mesh in a viewing area of the micropattern and a second trace in a non-viewing area of the micropattern electrically connected to the mesh, the mesh patterned to define a plurality of first traces having a first width and defining a plurality of enclosed open areas, at least a portion of the second trace having a second width greater than the first width, the second trace electrically connected to a larger metal feature disposed in the non-viewing area, wherein the first traces, the second trace, and the metal feature include a same metal at approximately a same thickness, and wherein the mesh is further patterned to define one or more third traces disposed to increase an optical uniformity of the viewing area of the micropattern. An electrically conductive micropattern patterned to define a mesh in a viewing area of the micropattern and a plurality of second traces in a non-viewing area of the micropattern, the mesh patterned to define a plurality of electrically conductive mesh electrodes, each of the mesh electrodes comprising a plurality of first traces having a first width and intersecting one another to define a plurality of enclosed open areas, the mesh electrode electrically connected to a corresponding second trace in the plurality of second traces, the second trace electrically connected to an electrically conductive pad for making electrical contact with an electronic device, at least a portion of the second trace having a second width greater than the first width, wherein for each of the mesh electrodes, the first traces and the corresponding second trace and the electrically conductive pad include a same metal at approximately a same thickness, and wherein the mesh is further patterned to define one or more third traces electrically isolated from any electrode defined by the micropattern. Present claim 2 is substantially similar to claim 9 of patent 12,093,490 and is similarly rejected. Present claim 10 is substantially similar to claim 1 of patent 12,093,490 and is similarly rejected. and is similarly rejected. Present claim 11 is substantially similar to claim 3 of patent 12,093,490 and is similarly rejected. and is similarly rejected. Present claim 13 is substantially similar to claim 8 of patent 12,093,490 and is similarly rejected. and is similarly rejected. Present claim 14 is substantially similar to claim 9 of patent 12,093,490 and is similarly rejected. and is similarly rejected. Present claim 15 is substantially similar to claim 5 of patent 12,093,490 and is similarly rejected. and is similarly rejected. Present claim 16 is substantially similar to claim 6 of patent 12,093,490 and is similarly rejected. and is similarly rejected. Present claim 17 is substantially similar to claim 7 of patent 12,093,490 and is similarly rejected. and is similarly rejected. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-8 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. Regarding claims 2-8, the prior art does not teach micropatterns for touch detection on a digital screen with the specific sizing and arrangements recited in claims 2-8. Regarding claim 12, the prior art does not teach “…wherein for at least one of the mesh electrodes, the one or more third traces comprises at least one trace disposed in an enclosed open area of the plurality of enclosed open areas in an interior of the mesh electrode.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW SASINOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-5883. The examiner can normally be reached 7am - 4pm, Mon.-Fri. 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, William Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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. /ANDREW SASINOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 16, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592249
HEAT ASSISTED MAGNETIC RECORDING WRITER HAVING A NOTCHED WRITE POLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12578788
Persistent Human-Machine Interfaces via Gaze and Eye Direction Tracking
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573339
DISPLAY DEVICE OPERATING WITH TIME-DIVISION AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567362
DISPLAY DEVICE, METHOD OF DRIVING THE DISPLAY DEVICE, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12567381
DRIVING CONTROLLER AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
78%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+12.0%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 855 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