Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/000,404

MOTOR

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Dec 01, 2022
Examiner
PERKINS, THEODORE L
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Minebea Mitsumi Inc.
OA Round
4 (Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
59 granted / 80 resolved
+5.8% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
106
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
57.7%
+17.7% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 80 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments, page 6 whole page thru page 7 lines 1 – 8, filed 11/06/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. In response to applicant's argument, page 8 lines 1 – 11, that Spring Calculations is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Spring Calculations discloses the variables, T, k, d, N, and D that make up the surge frequency (fs) of the elastic member and discloses variables f1 and N that can be derived to evaluate the natural vibration order (fn) of the elastic member that make up Applicant’s Expression 9 and Expression, one of ordinary skill in the art can use the variables of Spring Calculations, and Expression 9 and Expression to evaluate the fundamental frequency (fm) of the motor. In addition, a no-load rotation number (S) of the shaft can be evaluated from the evaluation of the fundamental frequency (fm) obtained through utilizing the variables of Spring Calculations and Applicant’s condition, fm = S/60 and fm = 1/2*S/60, respectively. Applicant's arguments, page 8 line 12 – 24 thru page 12 whole page, filed 11/06/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See the previous argument above. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1 – 3 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding Claim 1, line 12 states "fn < n*fl, n > 2/3*N". In Applicant’s specification, Para [0069] lines 6 – 8, discloses that “the vibration order and the natural vibration number have no proportional relationship in an order exceeding 2/3 of the vibration mode of the maximum order for each spring.” However, in the entire specification and drawings, there is no mention or explanation of the equations “fn < n*fl, n > 2/3*N”. For this reason, the claim is rejected. For examining purposes, the claim containing the limitation at question will be construed as being taught by the prior art. Appropriate correction is required. 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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1 – 6 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. Regarding Claim 1, the claim limitation recites "fn < n*fl, n > 2/3 * N" in line 12 and “the n order” in line 19, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Regarding Claims 2 – 3, they are rejected as being dependent on rejected claim 1. Regarding Claim 4, the claim limitation recites “fn < n*fl, n > 2/3 * N” in lines 11 – 12, and “the n order” in line 19, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Regarding Claims 5 – 6, they are rejected as being dependent on rejected claim 4. Appropriate correction is required. 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: 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. 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 – 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. in view of hereafter, Spring Calculations. Regarding Claim 1, Ito et al. discloses a motor (202) (Ito et al. Fig. 3) comprising: a shaft (207) (Ito et al. Fig. 3); a pair of bearings (212) fixed at the shaft (Ito et al. Fig. 3); a sleeve (215) configured to accommodate the pair of bearings (Ito et al. Fig. 3); a magnet (209) directly or indirectly fixed at one of the shaft and the sleeve (Ito et al. Fig. 3); a coil (211) directly or indirectly fixed at the other of the shaft and the sleeve and opposing the magnet (Ito et al. Fig. 3); and an elastic member (217) disposed between the pair of bearings (Ito et al. Fig. 3). Ito et al. does not disclose: wherein the elastic member satisfies the following Expression 9: the vibration mode of a natural vibration of the elastic member is generated up to the same order as the effective number of turns N of the elastic member, fn < n*fl, n > 2/3 * N, and fm < 2/3*N*fs, and resonance of the elastic member caused by rotation of the motor can be prevented, where fm = S/60, where fs = 1/T= k*d/2πND2, and where k= √ (g*G/2Ύ), in the above Expression 9, fn represents a vibration frequency (Hz) of the natural vibration in the vibration mode of the n order, f1 represents a vibration frequency (Hz) of the natural vibration in the vibration mode of the 1 order, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, y represents a unit volume weight [kg/m3] of a material of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft, and g represents gravitational acceleration, G represents a traverse elastic modulus of a material of the spring, fm represents a fundamental frequency of the motor, N represents an effective number of turns of the spring, T represents a time a surge wave makes one round trip along the elastic member, and fs is a surge frequency of the elastic member. Hereafter, Spring Calculations discloses: f1 (f1) represents a vibration frequency (Hz) of the natural vibration in the vibration mode of the 1 order, D (D2) represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), d (d) represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), 𝛾 (𝜔) represents a unit volume weight [kg/m3 ] of a material of the elastic member (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), and g (g) represents gravitational acceleration (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), G (G) represents a traverse elastic modulus of a material of the spring (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), N (Na) represents an effective number of turns of the spring (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), T (1/f) represents a time a surge wave makes one round trip along the elastic member (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), and fs (f) is a surge frequency of the elastic member (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols). This shows that when a person of ordinary skill in the art improves the functionality of a spring, the above variables are considered. Since Ito et al. discloses a spring 217 having the same structure, same position, same function as applicant’s claimed and disclosed spring, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have looked to Spring Calculations to satisfy Expression 9: the vibration mode of a natural vibration of the elastic member is generated up to the same order as the effective number of turns N of the elastic member, fn < n*fl, n > 2/3 * N, fm < 2/3*N*fs, and resonance of the elastic member caused by rotation of the motor can be prevented, where fm = S/60, where fs = 1/T = k*d/2πND2, and where k=√(g*G/2𝛾), to improve functionality of the spring. As a result, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ito et al. so that the elastic member satisfies the following Expression 9: the vibration mode of a natural vibration of the elastic member is generated up to the same order as the effective number of turns N of the elastic member, fn < n*fl, n > 2/3 * N, and fm < 2/3*N*fs, and resonance of the elastic member caused by rotation of the motor can be prevented, where fm = S/60, where fs = 1/T= k*d/2πND2, and where k= √ (g*G/2Ύ), in the above Expression 9, fn represents a vibration frequency (Hz) of the natural vibration in the vibration mode of the n order, f1 represents a vibration frequency (Hz) of the natural vibration in the vibration mode of the 1 order, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, y represents a unit volume weight [kg/m3] of a material of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft, and g represents gravitational acceleration, G represents a traverse elastic modulus of a material of the spring, fm represents a fundamental frequency of the motor, N represents an effective number of turns of the spring, T represents a time a surge wave makes one round trip along the elastic member, and fs is a surge frequency of the elastic member. Regarding Claim 2, Ito et al. has been discussed above, re claim 1; but does not disclose that the elastic member satisfies the following Expression 1a: Expression 1a S < 1.42*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 1a, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft. As discussed above, Spring Calculations discloses all the variables at question. Since Ito et al. discloses a spring 217 having the same structure, same position, and same function as Applicant’s claimed and disclosed spring, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have looked to spring calculations to optimize Expression 1a: Expression 1a S < 1.42*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 1a, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft for the same benefit of improving the spring’s functionality. As a result, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ito et al. so that the elastic member satisfies the following Expression 1a: Expression 1a S < 1.42*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 1a, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft, as taught by Spring Calculations to improve the functionality of the spring. Regarding Claim 3, Ito et al. has been discussed above, re claim 1; but does not disclose that the elastic member satisfies the following Expression 1b: S <0.71*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 1b, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft. As discussed above, Spring Calculations discloses all the variables at question. Since Ito et al. discloses a spring 217 having the same structure, same position, and same function as Applicant’s claimed and disclosed spring, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have looked to spring calculations to optimize Expression 1b: SS <0.71*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 1b, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft for the same benefit of improving the spring’s functionality. As a result, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ito et al. so that the elastic member satisfies the following Expression 1b: S <0.71*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 1b, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft, as taught by Spring Calculations to improve the functionality of the spring. Regarding Claim 4, Ito et al. discloses a motor (202) (Ito et al. Fig. 3) comprising: a shaft (207) (Ito et al. Fig. 3); a pair of bearings (212) fixed at the shaft (Ito et al. Fig. 3); a sleeve (215) configured to accommodate the pair of bearings (Ito et al. Fig. 3); a magnet (209) directly or indirectly fixed at one of the shaft and the sleeve (Ito et al. Fig. 3); a coil (211) directly or indirectly fixed at the other of the shaft and the sleeve and opposing the magnet (Ito et al. Fig. 3); and an elastic member (217) disposed between the pair of bearings (Ito et al. Fig. 3). Ito et al. does not disclose: wherein the elastic member satisfies the following Expression: the vibration mode of a natural vibration of the elastic member is generated up to the same order as the effective number of turns N of the elastic member, fn < n*fl, n > 2/3 * N, and fm > N*fs, and resonance of the elastic member caused by rotation of the motor can be prevented, where fm = 1/2*S/60, where fs = 1/T= k*d/2πND2, and where k= √ (g*G/2Ύ), in the above Expression, fn represents a vibration frequency (Hz) of the natural vibration in the vibration mode of the n order, f1 represents a vibration frequency (Hz) of the natural vibration in the vibration mode of the 1 order, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, y represents a unit volume weight [kg/m3] of a material of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft, and g represents gravitational acceleration, G represents a traverse elastic modulus of a material of the spring, fm represents a fundamental frequency of the motor, N represents an effective number of turns of the spring, T represents a time a surge wave makes one round trip along the elastic member, and fs is a surge frequency of the elastic member. Hereafter, Spring Calculations discloses: f1 (f1) represents a vibration frequency (Hz) of the natural vibration in the vibration mode of the 1 order, D (D2) represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), d (d) represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), 𝛾 (𝜔) represents a unit volume weight [kg/m3 ] of a material of the elastic member (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), and g (g) represents gravitational acceleration (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), G (G) represents a traverse elastic modulus of a material of the spring (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), N (Na) represents an effective number of turns of the spring (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), T (1/f) represents a time a surge wave makes one round trip along the elastic member (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols), and fs (f) is a surge frequency of the elastic member (hereafter, Spring Calculations, Table 1 Meaning of Symbols). This shows that when a person of ordinary skill in the art improves the functionality of a spring, the above variables are considered. Since Ito et al. discloses a spring 217 having the same structure, same position, same function as applicant’s claimed and disclosed spring, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have looked to Spring Calculations to satisfy Expression: the vibration mode of a natural vibration of the elastic member is generated up to the same order as the effective number of turns N of the elastic member, fn < n*fl, n > 2/3 * N, and fm > N*fs, and resonance of the elastic member caused by rotation of the motor can be prevented, where fm = 1/2*S/60, where fs = 1/T = k*d/2πND2, and where k=√(g*G/2𝛾), to improve functionality of the spring. As a result, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ito et al. so that the elastic member satisfies the following Expression: the vibration mode of a natural vibration of the elastic member is generated up to the same order as the effective number of turns N of the elastic member, fn < n*fl, n > 2/3 * N, and fm > N*fs, and resonance of the elastic member caused by rotation of the motor can be prevented, where fm = 1/2*S/60, where fs = 1/T= k*d/2πND2, and where k= √ (g*G/2Ύ), in the above Expression, fn represents a vibration frequency (Hz) of the natural vibration in the vibration mode of the n order, f1 represents a vibration frequency (Hz) of the natural vibration in the vibration mode of the 1 order, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, y represents a unit volume weight [kg/m3] of a material of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft, and g represents gravitational acceleration, G represents a traverse elastic modulus of a material of the spring, fm represents a fundamental frequency of the motor, N represents an effective number of turns of the spring, T represents a time a surge wave makes one round trip along the elastic member, and fs is a surge frequency of the elastic member. Regarding Claim 5, Ito et al. has been discussed above, re claim 1; but does not disclose that the elastic member satisfies the following Expression 2a: Expression 2a S > 4.20*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 2a, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft. As discussed above, Spring Calculations discloses all the variables at question. Since Ito et al. discloses a spring 217 having the same structure, same position, and same function as Applicant’s claimed and disclosed spring, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have looked to spring calculations to optimize Expression 2a: S > 4.20*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 2a, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft for the same benefit of improving the spring’s functionality. As a result, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ito et al. so that the elastic member satisfies the following Expression 2a: S > 4.20*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 2a, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft, as taught by Spring Calculations to improve the functionality of the spring. Regarding Claim 6, Ito et al. has been discussed above, re claim 1; but does not disclose that the elastic member satisfies the following Expression 2b: Expression 2b S > 10.78*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 2b, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft. As discussed above, Spring Calculations discloses all the variables at question. Since Ito et al. discloses a spring 217 having the same structure, same position, and same function as Applicant’s claimed and disclosed spring, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have looked to spring calculations to optimize Expression 2b: S > 10.78*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 2b, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft for the same benefit of improving the spring’s functionality. As a result, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ito et al. so that the elastic member satisfies the following Expression 2b: S > 10.78*104*d/D2 in the above Expression 2b, D represents an outer diameter [m] of the elastic member, d represents a wire diameter 𝜑 [m] of the elastic member, and S represents a no-load rotation number [rotation/min] of the shaft, as taught by Spring Calculations to improve the functionality of the spring. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE L PERKINS whose telephone number is (703)756-4629. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am- 17:00pm. 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, Christopher Koehler can be reached on (571) 272-3560. 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. /THEODORE L PERKINS/Examiner, Art Unit 2834 /TERRANCE L KENERLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 01, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 20, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Feb 13, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 14, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 20, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jul 23, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 06, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600432
HUB-TYPE ELECTRONIC DRIVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597836
INDUCTION ROTOR ASSEMBLY WITH THIN FOILS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597838
GENERATOR WITH MINIMAL TO NON-EXISTENT ROTATION RESISTANCE THROUGH CONTROLLED ATTRACTIONS AMONG ALL MAGNETS AND IRON CORES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592617
DEVICE FOR DETERMINING A TORQUE IN A DRIVETRAIN OF AN AT LEAST PARTIALLY ELECTRICALLY OPERATED MOTOR VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592594
ROTOR STRUCTURE, MOTOR STRUCTURE, AND LAUNDRY TREATMENT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+20.7%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 80 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