Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/331,981

AUTO-CALIBRATION FOR MULTI-POLE ANGLE SENSORS WITH MECHANICAL MODULATION

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 27, 2021
Examiner
GONZALEZ, MILTON
Art Unit
2852
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Allegro MicroSystems, LLC
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
497 granted / 638 resolved
+9.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
656
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
46.9%
+6.9% vs TC avg
§102
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
§112
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 638 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 § 103 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, 3-11, and 13-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakamaki et al. (US 7,298,109) in view of Lober et al. (DE 10 2017 202 218 A1) and Kameya (US 6,925,401), as evidenced by Koeck et al. (US 11,378,419). Regarding claims 1 and 24, Sakamaki et al. discloses a sensor (see Fig. 2B), comprising: a first detector circuit (i.e., as part of microcomputer 21, Fig. 2B) configured to generate a maxima signal, the maxima signal being a stream of first values, wherein each first value indicates a respective local maximum of a first signal in a different electrical period of the first signal (i.e., a process for detecting the maximal value of the sine wave signal by, for example, detecting a value indicating turning of the sine wave signal from an increase to a decrease; Step S4) (see Fig. 3 and col. 8, lines 44-50), the first signal being generated at least in part by a first magnetic field sensing element (i.e., reading a sine wave signal outputted from the resolver 25; Step S2) (see Fig. 3), the first signal being generated in response to a magnetic field that is indicative of rotation of a target (i.e., the rotor of motor 6); a second detector circuit (i.e., as part of microcomputer 21, Fig. 2B) configured to generate a minima signal, the minima signal being a stream of second values, wherein each second value indicates a respective local minimum of the first signal in a different electrical period of the first signal (i.e., a process for detecting the minimal value of the sine wave signal by detecting, for example, a value indicating turning of the sine wave signal from the decrease to the increase; Step S12) (see Fig. 3 and col. 8, lines 59-63); a first accumulator register (i.e., memory location that stores the detected maximal values to averaging them) configured to receive the maxima signal and generate a max sum signal, by adding N most recent first values in the maxima signal, the max sum signal being a stream of first sum values, each first sum value being equal to a sum of N most recent first values of the maxima signal; a second accumulator register (i.e., memory location that stores the detected minimal values to averaging them) configured to receive the minima signal and generate a min sum signal, by adding N most recent second values in the minima signal, the min sum signal being a stream of second sum values, each second sum value being equal to a sum of N most recent second values of the minima signal (see Fig. 3 and col. 8, lines 59-63); an arithmetic circuitry (i.e., as part of microcomputer 21, Fig. 2B) configured to: generate a gain adjustment signal based on the min sum signal and max sum signal, the gain adjustment signal being a gain adjustment coefficient, the gain adjustment coefficient being generated based on a respective first sum value and a respective second sum value (i.e., amplitude correction value; Step S30) (see Fig. 4); and generate a first adjusted signal by combining the first signal with the gain adjustment signal (see col. 9, lines 40-51 and Fig. 2B), wherein combining the first signal with the gain adjustment signal compensates, at least in part, for a mechanical modulation that is imparted on the first signal as a result of a mechanical misalignment between the sensor and the target [The examiner asserts that since the same gain adjustment is performed by Sakamaki et al. the same result must be expected. When there is no mechanical misalignment, the calculated adjustment values are expected to be zero (see Koeck et al. par. [0015]). Consequently, the calculated adjustment values of Sakamaki et al. are definitely a result of a mechanical misalignment between the sensor and the target]. Sakamaki et al. discloses sampling the sine and cosine signals of the resolver. Sine and cosine signals include a maximal value and minimal value per electrical period, therefore, by incrementing the parameter T1 and T2 every time a maximal value or a minimal value is detected, the electrical periods are counted in order to calculate the average values of maximal and minimal) (see Fig. 3 and col. 8, lines 44-50). Even assuming arguendo, without conceding, that Sakamaki et al. does not disclose N being equal to a count of electrical periods of the signal that occur during one full rotation of the target, Kameya shows that this feature is well known in the art. Kameya discloses calculating the average values of maximal and minimal of a signal that occur during one full rotation of the target (see Figure 2 and col. 1, line 51 thorough col. 2, line 10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, such as, improved detection accuracy. Even assuming arguendo, without conceding, that Sakamaki et al. does not disclose the gain adjustment signals being streams of gain adjustment coefficients, Lober et al. shows that this feature is well known in the art. Lober et al. discloses a sensor, wherein the gain adjustment signal is a stream of gain adjustment coefficients (see Fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, such as, enabling accurate, reliable and fast corrections. Regarding claim 3, Sakamaki et al. discloses a sensor, wherein: the arithmetic circuitry is further configured to generate an offset adjustment signal based on the min sum signal and the max sum signal, the offset adjustment signal being an offset adjustment coefficient, the offset adjustment coefficient being generated based on a different first sum value and a different second sum value (i.e., offset correction value; Step S26) (see Fig. 4), and the first adjusted signal is generated by further combining the first signal with the offset adjustment signal. Even assuming arguendo, without conceding, that Sakamaki et al. does not disclose the offset adjustment signals being streams of offset adjustment coefficients, Lober et al. shows that this feature is well known in the art. Lober et al. discloses a sensor, wherein the offset adjustment signal is a stream of offset adjustment coefficients (see Fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, such as, enabling accurate, reliable and fast corrections. Regarding claim 4, Sakamaki et al. discloses a sensor, wherein combining the first signal with the offset adjustment signal and the gain adjustment signal includes multiplying the gain adjustment signal by a sum of the first signal and the offset adjustment signal (see col. 9, lines 40-51 and Fig. 2B). Regarding claim 5, Sakamaki et al. discloses a sensor, wherein the first gain adjustment signal is generated in accordance with the following expression: PNG media_image1.png 72 464 media_image1.png Greyscale where Maxi; is a local maximum of the first signal for the i-th electrical period of the first signal, and Mini is a local minimum of the first signal for the i-th electrical period of the first signal (see Step S30). Regarding claim 6, Sakamaki et al. discloses a sensor, wherein the first offset adjustment signal is generated in accordance with the following expression: PNG media_image2.png 74 484 media_image2.png Greyscale where Maxi; is a local maximum of the first signal for the i-th electrical period of the first signal, and Mini is a local minimum of the first signal for the i-th electrical period of the first signal (see Step S26). Regarding claims 7 and 26, Sakamaki et al. discloses a sensor, wherein: each of the first values includes the largest value of the first signal that is sampled during a respective electrical period, and each of the second values includes the smallest value of the first signal that is sampled during a respective electrical period (see Fig. 3 and col. 8, lines 44-63). Regarding claim 8, Sakamaki et al. discloses a sensor, wherein: any of the offset adjustment coefficients is generated based, at least in part, on a sum of a respective first sum value and a respective second sum value (see Step S30, Fig. 4), and the offset adjustment signal is generated, at least in part, by adding the first sum to the second sum (see Step S26, Fig. 4). Regarding claim 9, Sakamaki et al. discloses a sensor, wherein the first magnetic field sensing element includes at least one of a receiver coil (i.e., resolver 25) (see Fig. 2B). Regarding claim 10, Sakamaki et al. discloses a sensor, wherein the first detector circuit, the second detector circuit, the first accumulator register, the second accumulator register, the arithmetic circuitry are part of a first adjustment circuit (see Fig. 2B), the sensor further comprising a second adjustment circuit that is configured to generate a second adjusted signal based on a second signal, the second signal being generated at least in part by a second magnetic field sensing element i.e., reading a sine wave signal outputted from the resolver 25; Step S2) (see Fig. 3), the second signal being generated in response to the magnetic field that is indicative of rotation of the target, the second adjusted signal being used together with the first adjusted signal to generate an output signal indicative of an angular position of the target (see Fig. 2B). Regarding claims 11 and 21, Sakamaki et al. discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing one or more processor-executable instructions (see col. 8, lines 13-27), which, when executed by at least one processor (element 21, Fig. 2B), cause the at least one processor to perform the operations/method of: receiving a signal (i.e., reading a sine wave signal outputted from the resolver 25; Step S2) (see Fig. 3), the signal being generated by a sensing element in response to a magnetic field that is indicative of rotation of a target (i.e., the rotor of motor 6); generating a first maxima signal, the first maxima signal being a stream of first values, wherein each first value indicates a respective local maximum of the first signal in a different electrical period of the first signal (i.e., a process for detecting the maximal value of the sine wave signal by, for example, detecting a value indicating turning of the sine wave signal from an increase to a decrease; Step S4) (see Fig. 3 and col. 8, lines 44-50); generating a minima signal, the minima signal being a stream of second values, wherein each second value indicates a respective local minimum of the first signal in a different electrical period of the first signal (i.e., a process for detecting the minimal value of the sine wave signal by detecting, for example, a value indicating turning of the sine wave signal from the decrease to the increase; Step S12) (see Fig. 3 and col. 8, lines 59-63); generating a max sum signal, the max sum signal being a stream of first sum values, each first sum value being equal to a sum of N most recent first values of the first maxima signal; generating a min sum signal, the min sum signal being a stream of second sum values, each second sum value being equal to a sum of N most recent second values of the minima signal (see Fig. 3 and col. 8, lines 59-63); generating a gain adjustment signal based on the max sum signal and the min sum signal, the gain adjustment signal being a gain adjustment coefficient, the gain adjustment coefficient being generated based on a respective first sum value and a respective second sum value (i.e., amplitude correction value; Step S30) (see Fig. 4) (i.e., amplitude correction value; Step S30) (see Fig. 4); and generating a first adjusted signal by combining the first signal with the gain adjustment signal (see col. 9, lines 40-51 and Fig. 2B), wherein combining the first signal with the gain adjustment signal compensates, at least in part, for a mechanical modulation that is imparted on the first signal as a result of a mechanical misalignment between the sensor and the target [The examiner asserts that since the same gain adjustment is performed by Sakamaki et al. the same result must be expected. When there is no mechanical misalignment, the calculated adjustment values are expected to be zero (see Koeck et al. par. [0015]). Consequently, the calculated adjustment values of Sakamaki et al. are definitely a result of a mechanical misalignment between the sensor and the target]. Sakamaki et al. discloses sampling the sine and cosine signals of the resolver. Sine and cosine signals include a maximal value and minimal value per electrical period, therefore, by incrementing the parameter T1 and T2 every time a maximal value or a minimal value is detected, the electrical periods are counted in order to calculate the average values of maximal and minimal) (see Fig. 3 and col. 8, lines 44-50). Even assuming arguendo, without conceding, that Sakamaki et al. does not disclose N being equal to a count of electrical periods of the signal that occur during one full rotation of the target, Kameya shows that this feature is well known in the art. Kameya discloses calculating the average values of maximal and minimal of a signal that occur during one full rotation of the target (see Figure 2 and col. 1, line 51 thorough col. 2, line 10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, such as, improved detection accuracy. Even assuming arguendo, without conceding, that Sakamaki et al. does not disclose the offset and gain adjustment signals being streams of offset and gain adjustment coefficients, Lober et al. shows that this feature is well known in the art. Lober et al. discloses a sensor, wherein the offset adjustment signal is a stream of offset adjustment coefficients and the gain adjustment signal is a stream of gain adjustment coefficients (see Fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, such as, enabling accurate, reliable and fast corrections. Regarding claim 13, Sakamaki et al. discloses a method, further comprising: generating an offset adjustment signal based on the max sum signal and the min sum signal, the offset adjustment signal being an offset adjustment coefficient, the offset adjustment coefficient being generated based on a different first sum value and a different second sum value (i.e., offset correction value; Step S26) (see Fig. 4); and wherein the first adjusted signal is generated by further combining the first signal with the offset adjustment signal (see Fig. 4). Even assuming arguendo, without conceding, that Sakamaki et al. does not disclose the offset adjustment signals being streams of offset adjustment coefficients, Lober et al. shows that this feature is well known in the art. Lober et al. discloses a sensor, wherein the offset adjustment signal is a stream of offset adjustment coefficients (see Fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, such as, enabling accurate, reliable and fast corrections. Regarding claim 14, Sakamaki et al. discloses a method, wherein combining the first signal with the offset adjustment signal and the gain adjustment signal includes multiplying the gain adjustment signal by a sum of the first signal and the offset adjustment signal (see col. 9, lines 40-51 and Fig. 2B). Regarding claim 15, Sakamaki et al. discloses a method, wherein the first gain adjustment signal is generated in accordance with the following expression: PNG media_image1.png 72 464 media_image1.png Greyscale where Maxi; is a local maximum of the first signal for the i-th electrical period of the first signal, and Mini is a local minimum of the first signal for the i-th electrical period of the first signal (see Step S30). Regarding claim 16, Sakamaki et al. discloses a method, wherein the first offset adjustment signal is generated in accordance with the following expression: PNG media_image2.png 74 484 media_image2.png Greyscale where Maxi; is a local maximum of the first signal for the i-th electrical period of the first signal, and Mini is a local minimum of the first signal for the i-th electrical period of the first signal (see Step S26). Regarding claims 17 and 23, Sakamaki et al. discloses a method, further comprising sampling the first signal over the N electrical periods of the first signal, wherein: each of the first values includes the largest value of the first signal that is sampled during a respective electrical period, and each of the second values includes the smallest value of the first signal that is sampled during a respective electrical period (see Fig. 3 and col. 8, lines 44-63). Regarding claim 18, Sakamaki et al. discloses a method, wherein: any of the offset adjustment coefficients is generated based, at least in part, on a sum of a respective first sum value and a respective second sum value (see Step S30, Fig. 4), and the offset adjustment signal is generated, at least in part, by adding the first sum to the second sum (see Step S26, Fig. 4). Regarding claim 19, Sakamaki et al. discloses a method, wherein the first magnetic field sensing element includes at least one of a receiver coil (i.e., resolver 25) (see Fig. 2B), the method further comprising generating an output signal based, at least in part, on the adjusted first signal (see col. 9, lines 40-51 and Fig. 2B). Regarding claim 20, Sakamaki et al. discloses a method, further comprising: generating a second adjusted signal based on a second signal, the second signal being generated at least in part by a second magnetic field sensing element (i.e., reading a cosine wave signal outputted from the resolver 25) (see Fig. 3 and col. 9, lines 52-59), the second signal being generated in response to the magnetic field that is indicative of rotation of the target, generating an output signal based on the first adjusted signal and the second adjusted signal, the output signal being indicative of an angular position of the target (see Fig. 2B). Regarding claims 22 and 25, Sakamaki et al. discloses a method, configured to generate an offset adjustment signal based on the min sum signal and the max sum signal, the offset adjustment signal being an offset adjustment coefficient, the offset adjustment coefficient being generated based on a different first sum value and a different second sum value (i.e., offset correction value; Step S26) (see Fig. 4), and the first adjusted signal is generated by further combining the first signal with the offset adjustment signal, combining the first signal with the gain adjustment signal compensates, at least in part, an offset and gain of the first signal for a mechanical modulation that is imparted on the first signal as a result of a mechanical misalignment between the sensor and the target [The examiner asserts that since the same gain adjustment is performed by Sakamaki et al. the same result must be expected. When there is no mechanical misalignment, the calculated adjustment values are expected to be zero (see Koeck et al. par. [0015]). Consequently, the calculated adjustment values of Sakamaki et al. are definitely a result of a mechanical misalignment between the sensor and the target]. Even assuming arguendo, without conceding, that Sakamaki et al. does not disclose the offset adjustment signals being streams of offset adjustment coefficients, Lober et al. shows that this feature is well known in the art. Lober et al. discloses a sensor, wherein the offset adjustment signal is a stream of offset adjustment coefficients (see Fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, such as, enabling accurate, reliable and fast corrections. Response to Arguments The argued limitations of amended claims 1, 11, 21, and 24 are now rejected over Sakamaki et al. in view of Lober et al. and newly discovered Kameya (US 6,925,401) with newly discovered Koeck et al. (US 11,378,419) as evidence. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MILTON GONZALEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7914. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 5:00 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, WALTER LINDSAY can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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. /WALTER L LINDSAY JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2852 /M.G/Examiner, Art Unit 2852 11/4/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 27, 2021
Application Filed
Nov 19, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 15, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 15, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 07, 2024
Response Filed
Oct 04, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 03, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 11, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 15, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 15, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 23, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601771
SENSOR DEVICE FOR AN ELECTRICAL TERMINAL ARRANGEMENT, ELECTRICAL TERMINAL ARRANGEMENT, ELECTRICAL TERMINAL BLOCK, SWITCHGEAR CABINET AND READ-OUT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601612
VEHICLE SYSTEM INCLUDING SENSOR UNIT FOR DETECTING MAGNETIC MARKER LAID ON A ROAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596151
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TESTING PERFORMANCE OF RELAY CONTACT BASED ON INFRARED THERMAL IMAGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590819
POSITION DETECTION DEVICE AND BRAKE PEDAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584974
Device For Determining Cell Voltages Across Series-Connected Battery Cells And Method For Determining Cell Voltages
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+12.7%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 638 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