Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/191,059

IDENTIFYING ONE OR MORE ACQUISITIONS OF INTEREST USING VISUAL QUALIFICATION

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 03, 2021
Examiner
NGHIEM, MICHAEL P
Art Unit
2857
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Tektronix Inc.
OA Round
7 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
624 granted / 926 resolved
-0.6% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
986
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§103
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
§102
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
§112
33.4%
-6.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 926 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
BOVEDETAILED 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 . The amendment filed on November 23, 2025 has been considered. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on November 23, 2025 has been entered. 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin et al. (US 2014/0160144) in view of Marttiny et al. (BE 1021546). Regarding claims 1 and 8, Martin et al. discloses a test and measurement instrument (Figs. 1, 2), comprising: an input channel (including 105, 205, Fig. 2) configured to receive an input signal (105, 205, receiving an input signal, Fig. 2) from a device under test (acquiring plural waveforms via plural channels, paragraph 0008, lines 1-4) and acquire a plurality of different waveforms from the input signal (215 acquiring waveforms, i.e., waveform that has peaks via 230, waveform that has low frequency via 225), each of the plurality of different waveforms acquired from the input signal at different times (the different waveforms are from the input signal from ADC 205, Fig. 2; ADC’s 205 receive electrical signals from probes 105, 107, paragraph 0028, lines 8-11, one would know that the acquisitions of electrical signals can occur multiple times, thus, the electrical signal are received at different times); a memory configured to store the plurality of acquired waveforms (Abstract, lines 1-4); a display configured to display a graphical user interface (GUI) and a selected set of the plurality of acquired waveforms in the GUI (display waveform styles, Abstract, lines 1-2), a user input configured to receive a selection from a user (user selection, Abstract, lines 5-11), the selection further comprising a type of the region of interest (waveforms of unfiltered data, Fig. 3, or filtered data, Fig. 4), one or more processors (122/130) configured to: render the plurality of acquired waveforms overlaid in the GUI (paragraph 0005, lines 10-13), after the plurality of acquired waveforms are rendered in the GUI, receive the selection from the user input (user selection to switch to unfiltered waveforms (Fig. 3) after filtered waveforms (Fig. 4) are displayed, Abstract, lines 5-11). However, Martin et al. does not disclose the selection comprising the user using a cursor in the GUI to draw a shape, the shape defining a region of interest in the GUI, the selection defining a subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display, determine the subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that are associated with the region of interest according to the type of the region of interest, and render only the subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms in the GUI. Martiny et al. discloses the selection comprising the user using a cursor in the GUI to draw a shape (using a mouse to draw a region of interest, page 9, paragraph 5, line 6), the shape defining a region of interest in the GUI (page 9, paragraph 5, lines 6-7), the selection defining a subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display (display window of waveform, page 9, paragraph 5, line 7), determine the subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that are associated with the region of interest according to the type of the region of interest (page 9, paragraph 5, lines 6-7), and render only the subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms in the GUI (selected region of interest to display, page 9, paragraph 5, lines 6-7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Martin et al. with a selected region of interest as disclosed by Martiny et al. for the purpose of displaying the waveform portion of interest. Regarding claim 2, Martin et al. does not disclose the selection comprises the user drawing multiple shapes, each shape defining one of multiple regions of interest, each region of interest having a type, and the one or more processors are further configured to determine the subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that are associated with at least one of the regions of interest according to the types of the regions of interest. Marttiny et al. discloses the selection comprises the user drawing multiple shapes (user can draw a display window using a mouse by providing a display window width, page 9, paragraph 5, lines 6-7), each shape defining one of multiple regions of interest (the display window selects a region of interest, page 9, paragraph 5, line 6), each region of interest having a type (a selected region of interest, page 9, paragraph 5, line 6), and the one or more processors are further configured to determine the subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms (regions of interest of waveform signals) of the plurality of acquired waveforms (waveform signals) that are associated with at least one of the regions of interest according to the types of the regions of interest (computerized method provides a display window and display window width to select a region of interest of waveform signals, page 9, paragraph 5, lines 6-7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Martin et al. with drawing a display window as disclosed by Martiny et al. for the purpose of displaying a region of interest of the waveform. Regarding claim 3, Martin et al. does not disclose the one or more processors are further configured to determine the subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that are associated with each of the regions of interest according to the types of the regions of interest. Marttiny et al. discloses the one or more processors are further configured to determine the subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms (regions of interest of waveform signals) of the plurality of acquired waveforms (waveform signals) that are associated with each of the regions of interest according to the types of the regions of interest (computerized method provides a display window and display window width to select a region of interest of a waveform, page 9, paragraph 5, lines 6-7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Martin et al. with a display window as disclosed by Martiny et al. for the purpose of displaying regions of interest of the waveform. Regarding claims 4 and 5, Martin et al. does not disclose the selection is a first selection and the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a second selection from the user input, the second selection comprising the user using a cursor in the GUI to draw a shape, the shape defining a second region of interest in the GUI, the second selection further comprising a type of the second region of interest, determine a second subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that are associated with the second region of interest according to the type of the second region of interest, and render only the second subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms in the GUI. Regarding claims 4 and 5, Martin et al. as modified by Marttiny et al. discloses the claimed limitations, except the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a second selection from the user input, the second selection comprising the user using a cursor in the GUI to draw a shape, the shape defining a second region of interest in the GUI, the second selection further comprising a type of the second region of interest, determine a second subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that are associated with the second region of interest according to the type of the second region of interest, and render only the second subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms in the GUI. As discussed above with regard to claim 1, Martin et al. as modified by Marttiny et al. discloses receiving a selection from the user input the selection comprising the user using a cursor in the GUI to draw a shape (using a mouse to draw a region of interest, page 9, paragraph 5, line 6), the shape defining a region of interest in the GUI (page 9, paragraph 5, lines 6-7), the selection defining a subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display (display window of waveform, page 9, paragraph 5, line 7), determine the subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that are associated with the region of interest according to the type of the region of interest (page 9, paragraph 5, lines 6-7). It would been obvious to receive a second selection from the user input since Marttiny et al. discloses that the selection (user selection of a region of interest using a cursor, via a mouse, page 9, paragraph 5, line 6) can be modified by providing another display window width (page 9, paragraph 5, line 7) to select another region of interest of the waveform. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Martin et al. with a second selection from a user as disclosed by Martiny et al. for the purpose of selecting another region of interest of the waveform. Regarding claims 6 and 13, Martin et al. discloses the modification is adding a second region of interest (user selected waveforms of filtered data, displayed in Fig. 4), deleting the region of interest, or changing a characteristic of the region of interest (user selected waveforms of filtered data, displayed in Fig. 4). Regarding claims 7 and 14, Martin et al. discloses the selection is a waveform characteristic (waveforms with unfiltered or filtered data), and the one or more processors determine the region of interest based on the waveform characteristic (whether waveforms with unfiltered or filtered data are user selected). Regarding claim 9, Martin et al. discloses the filter criteria is based on multiple regions of interest (portions 340, 440, Figs. 3, 4; paragraph 0041, lines 1-3), and the filtered waveforms (340, Fig. 4) include waveforms from the plurality of acquired waveforms that are within at least one of the regions of interest (Fig. 4). Regarding claim 10, Martin et al. discloses filtered waveforms (Fig. 4) include waveforms from the plurality of acquired waveforms are within each of the regions of interest (waveforms of unfiltered/filtered data are user selected, Figs. 3, 4). Regarding claim 11, Martin et al. discloses the filter criteria is a first filter criteria (selection of unfiltered data, Abstract, lines 7-8) further includes: receiving a second filter criteria from the user input (user selection of filtered data, Abstract, lines 10-11), filtering the plurality of acquired waveforms from the memory based on the second filter criteria to determine filtered waveforms (user selected waveforms of filtered data, Abstract, lines 10-11). Regarding claim 12, Martin et al. discloses receiving a modification of the filter criteria from the user input (receive a user selection to display filtered/unfiltered waveform, Abstract, lines 5-11); and filtering the plurality of acquired waveforms from the memory based on the modified filter criteria to determine filtered waveforms (Fig. 4). Regarding claim 15, Martin in view of Marttiny et al. discloses the claim limitations as discussed above with regard to claims 1 and 8. Martin et al. further discloses display a plurality of acquired waveforms from a memory on a display (Abstract, lines 1-4) on a display (145) (Abstract; Figs. 3, 4; paragraph 0008, lines 1-6), wherein each of the acquired waveforms is acquired from a different portion of a same input signal from a device under test (215 acquiring waveforms, i.e., waveform that has peaks via 230, waveform that has low frequency via 225, where the different waveforms are from the input signal from ADC 205, Fig. 2) update the display to display only the filtered waveforms from the plurality of acquired waveforms (filtered data are displayed, Fig 4, based on user selection, Abstract, lines 5-11). Regarding claim 16, Martin et al. discloses the claim limitation as discussed above with respect to claim 9. Regarding claim 17, Martin et al. discloses the claim limitation as discussed above with respect to claim 10. Regarding claim 18, Martin et al. discloses the claim limitation as discussed above with respect to claim 12. Regarding claim 19, Martin et al. discloses the claim limitation as discussed above with respect to claims 6 and 13. Regarding claim 20, Martin et al. discloses the claim limitation as discussed above with respect to claims 7 and 14. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed on November 23, 2025 have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 112(a) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections under 35 USC 112(a) have been withdrawn. With regard to the rejections under 35 USC 103, Applicants argue “[i]n fundamental contrast to claim 1 (and similarly to claims 8 and 15), in Martin, each of the multiple different types of waveforms that are produced are all acquired from the input signal at the same time. Martin calls these different types of waveforms “data streams” or “data samples.” See, e.g. Martin [0029] and Fig. 2, where data samples from ADC 205 are fed in parallel through decimator circuit 220 to produce “compressed data” i.e. a “compressed waveform,” low pass filter circuit 225 to produce “lowpass filtered data samples” 1.e. a “lowpass filtered waveform,” and peak detector circuit 230 to produce “peak detect data samples” 1.e. a “peak detect waveform.” In other words, Martin makes a single acquisition of data samples from the input signal at one time, and then processes those acquired data samples in different ways to produce different types of “waveforms.” Therefore, Martin fails to teach “an input channel configured to receive an input signal from a device under test and acquire a plurality of different waveforms from the input signal, each of the plurality of different waveforms acquired from the input signal at different times,” as recited in amended claim 1 (emphasis added).” Examiner’s position is that Martin discloses a test and measurement instrument, e.g., an oscilloscope for acquiring and sampling electrical signals (paragraph 0003). One of ordinary skill in the art would know that the test and measurement instrument (oscilloscope) would not just make a single acquisition of electrical signals but rather would acquire the electrical signals at multiple times. Accordingly, the electrical signals or waveforms are acquired at different times. Martin further discloses “[t]he acquisition circuits include analog-to-digital converters (ADCs) (e.g., 205 and 245), which collectively sample the electrical signals received through the respective probes (e.g., 105 and 107)” (paragraph 0028). One of ordinary skill in the art would know that the ADCs would collectively sample the electrical signals received through the respective probes (e.g., 105 and 107) at multiple times (not just one time). Accordingly, the electrical signals or waveforms are acquired at different times. Applicants further argue “Martiny fails to remedy these deficiencies of Martin. …Thus, the combination of Martin and Martiny still fail to teach “an input channel configured to receive an input signal from a device under test and acquire a plurality of different waveforms from the input signal, each of the plurality of different waveforms acquired from the input signal at different times,” as recited in amended claim 1 (emphasis added).” Examiner’s position, as discussed above, is that Martin discloses “an input channel (including 105, 205, Fig. 2) configured to receive an input signal (105, 205, receiving an input signal, Fig. 2) from a device under test (acquiring plural waveforms via plural channels, paragraph 0008, lines 1-4) and acquire a plurality of different waveforms from the input signal (215 acquiring waveforms, i.e., waveform that has peaks via 230, waveform that has low frequency via 225), each of the plurality of different waveforms acquired from the input signal at different times (the different waveforms are from the input signal from ADC 205, Fig. 2; ADC’s 205 receive electrical signals from probes 105, 107, paragraph 0028, lines 8-11, one would know that the acquisitions of electrical signals can occur multiple times, thus, the electrical signal are received at different times)”. Applicant’s remaining arguments have been considered but are traversed in view of the grounds of rejection and discussion above. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Miller (US 9,496,993) discloses a method of acquiring an input waveform (Abstract) comprising sampling, by the electronic measurement instrument, the input waveform to identify values for the input waveform at different times (claim 1, lines 5-7). Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Nghiem whose telephone number is (571) 272-2277. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571) 272-2302. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /MICHAEL P NGHIEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 December 12, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 03, 2021
Application Filed
Jul 11, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 15, 2022
Response Filed
Feb 12, 2023
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 30, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 10, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 17, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 01, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 10, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 15, 2024
Response Filed
Apr 08, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Jul 12, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 15, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 02, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 07, 2025
Response Filed
May 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 23, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584972
BATTERY DIAGNOSIS APPARATUS AND BATTERY DIAGNOSIS METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578399
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MONITORING A THROUGH FAULT CURRENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12558733
MULTIWIRE ELECTRIC DISCHARGE MACHINE AND MULTIWIRE ELECTRIC DISCHARGE MACHINING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12546646
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING THE TEMPERATURE OF A SEMICONDUCTOR WAFER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12541035
RANDOM NOISE ATTENUATION FOR SEISMIC DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+24.0%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 926 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