Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 17/778,323

Multilayer Switchdome Systems and Methods

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 19, 2022
Examiner
CAROC, LHEIREN MAE ANGLO
Art Unit
2831
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Snaptron, INC.
OA Round
9 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
9-10
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
769 granted / 990 resolved
+9.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1023
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
40.7%
+0.7% vs TC avg
§102
42.2%
+2.2% vs TC avg
§112
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 990 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/01/2025 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 14-18, 42 and 51-53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yashima et al. [Yashima hereinafter, US 10,290,442]. In regard to claim 14, Yashima discloses [in Figs. 2 and 4-6] an integrated compound spring switchdome action apparatus comprising: a layer of switchdome spring material [21] configured as part of a single switchdome; a layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] having an elastically deformable portion configured as part of said single switchdome, wherein substantially all of said layer of switchdome spring material [21] is adjacent to substantially all of said layer of switchdome arciform material [22]; wherein an outer edge of said layer of switchdome spring material [21] shares a same boundary as an outer edge of said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22]; a single partial switchdome bond [bond between 21a and 22a] established at least at one single location between said layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] as a bonded switchdome locale, wherein said single partial switchdome bond is configured to only partially prevent relative movement between said layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22]; and an adjacent non-bonded switchdome locale [locale surrounding 21d] between said layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] at least a portion of which is adjacent said bonded switchdome locale, wherein said adjacent non-bonded switchdome locale does not have a switchdome bond attached to said layer of switchdome spring material [21] or to said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22]. In regard to claim 15, Yashima discloses [in Figs. 2 and 4-6] the integrated compound spring switchdome action apparatus as described in claim 14 wherein said bonded switchdome locale comprises a switchdome bonded dome locale and wherein said adjacent non-bonded switchdome locale comprises a non-bonded dome locale. In regard to claim 16, Yashima discloses [in Figs. 2 and 4-6] the integrated compound spring switchdome action apparatus as described in claim 14 wherein said bonded switchdome locale comprises a central axis bonded switchdome locale. In regard to claim 17, Yashima discloses [in Figs. 2 and 4-6] the integrated compound spring switchdome action apparatus as described in claim 16 wherein said adjacent non-bonded switchdome locale comprises an off central axis non-bonded switchdome locale. In regard to claim 18, Yashima discloses [in Figs. 2 and 4-6] the integrated compound spring switchdome action apparatus as described in claim 14 wherein said layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] having an elastically deformable portion comprises dome formed switchdome spring material. In regard to claim 42, Yashima discloses [in Figs. 2 and 4-6] an integrated compound spring switchdome action apparatus comprising: a first layer of switchdome spring material [21] having an elastically deformable portion configured as part of a single switchdome; at least a second layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] having an elastically deformable portion configured as part of said single switchdome; wherein said first layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said at least second layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] are shaped to form some corresponding deformable spring regions; wherein substantially all of said first layer of switchdome spring material [21] is adjacent to substantially all of said at least second layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22]; wherein an outer edge of said first layer of switchdome spring material [21] shares a same boundary as an outer edge of said at least second layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22]; and a switchdome bond [bond between 21a and 22a] established at least at one location between said first layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said at least second layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22], wherein said switchdome bond is configured to join said layers and establish said switchdome formed from said first layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said at least second layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22], wherein any bond between said first layer of spring material [21] and said second layer of arciform spring material [22] are at a same thickness. In regard to claim 51, Yashima discloses [in Figs. 2 and 4-6] the integrated compound spring switchdome action apparatus as described in claim 42 wherein said second layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] comprises a continuous layer of said switchdome arciform spring material. In regard to claim 52, Yashima discloses [in Figs. 2 and 4-6] the integrated compound spring switchdome action apparatus as described in claim 42 wherein said first layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said at least second layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] comprise compositionally homologous spring materials [col. 3, lines 35-39]. In regard to claim 53, Yashima discloses [in Figs. 2 and 4-6] the integrated compound spring switchdome action apparatus as described in claim 14 wherein said layer of switchdome spring material and said layer of switchdome arciform spring material comprise compositionally homologous spring materials [col. 3, lines 35-39]. 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. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yashima et al. [Yashima hereinafter, US 10,290,442] in view of Watanabe et al. [Watanabe hereinafter, US 2016/0071665]. Yashima discloses the integrated compound spring switchdome action apparatus as described in claim 14 wherein said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] has an elastically deformable portion. Yashima does not disclose that the layer of switchdome arciform spring material comprises a bandiformed spring material. Watanabe teaches [in Fig. 1] that the layer of switchdome arciform spring material comprises a bandiformed spring material [30]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have used any various shape, since selection and use of any known equivalent shape would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-10 and 13 are allowed. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 10/01/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With respect to claims 14 and 42, Applicant argues that “the Yashima reference does not teach, inter alia, "a single partial switchdome bond established at least at one single location between said layer of switchdome spring material and said layer of switchdome arciform spring material as a bonded switchdome locale, wherein said single partial switchdome bond is configured to only partially prevent relative movement between said layer of switchdome spring material and said layer of switchdome arciform spring material" from claim 14 nor does Yashima teach, inter alia, "a switchdome bond established at least at one location between said first layer of switchdome spring material and said at least second layer of switchdome arciform spring material, wherein said switchdome bond is configured to join said layers and establish said switchdome formed from said first layer of switchdome spring material and said at least second layer of switchdome arciform spring material, wherein any bond between said first layer of spring material and said second layer of arciform spring material are at a same thickness" from claim 42. Instead, the first and second moveable contacts of Yashima are free and unbonded.” Applicant further points to: col. 3, lines 35-39 and argues that “Yashima explicitly says the contacts are stacked -not bonded or otherwise attached. Stacking implies they are separate free pieces merely placed together”; col. 3, lines 39-40 arguing that “This demonstrates that the second contact is optional, reinforcing that it is not an integral bonded layer of a single switchdome, but simply an independent piece that can be added or Removed”; and points to Fig. 4 to show that “ the second movable contact 22 is shaped to fit over the first movable contact 21, and functions together with the first movable contact 21." Again, this shows that one movable contact "fits over" the other. There is no mention of adhesion, welding, or partial bonds. Instead, it's a loose mechanical fit -they remain free to move relative to each other except as constrained by shape and housing pressure”. The Examiner disagrees. Oxford languages defines a bond as “a connection between two surfaces or objects that have been joined together, especially by means of an adhesive substance, heat, or pressure.” Yashima clearly discloses [in Figs. 2 and 4-6] a single partial switchdome bond [bond between 21a and 22a] established at least at one single location between said layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] as a bonded switchdome locale, wherein said single partial switchdome bond is configured to only partially prevent relative movement between said layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22]; and an adjacent non-bonded switchdome locale [locale surrounding 21d] between said layer of switchdome spring material [21] and said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22] at least a portion of which is adjacent said bonded switchdome locale, wherein said adjacent non-bonded switchdome locale does not have a switchdome bond attached to said layer of switchdome spring material [21] or to said layer of switchdome arciform spring material [22]. There is a connection between two surfaces of [21 and 22] that have been joined together in the assembled state, by means of pressure, as defined by Oxford languages. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LHEIREN MAE A CAROC whose telephone number is (571)272-2730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:00pm. 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, Renee Luebke can be reached at 571-272-2009. 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. /LHEIREN MAE A CAROC/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2833
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 19, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 13, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 01, 2023
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 11, 2023
Examiner Interview Summary
May 23, 2023
Response Filed
Jun 06, 2023
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 27, 2023
Interview Requested
Oct 10, 2023
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 12, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 13, 2023
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 13, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 21, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 14, 2023
Response Filed
Jan 12, 2024
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jul 16, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 24, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 24, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Feb 18, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 24, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 23, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 03, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 27, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 01, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 16, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 26, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603237
PUSH BUTTON FOR ACTUATING SWITCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597571
BUTTON APPARATUS AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592351
PYROTECHNIC CIRCUIT BREAKER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586740
STACK KEY STRUCTURE AND BALANCE-SHAFT SEAT THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578802
ELECTRICAL KEY SUPPORT MEMBRANE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

9-10
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+14.5%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 990 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month