Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/050,408

APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DESIGNING AMPLIFIER

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Oct 27, 2022
Examiner
KLIMOWICZ, WILLIAM JOSEPH
Art Unit
2688
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Gentle Energy Corp.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
1038 granted / 1284 resolved
+18.8% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1318
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
42.5%
+2.5% vs TC avg
§102
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
§112
18.1%
-21.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1284 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Foreign Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 27, 2022 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings were received on October 27, 2022. These drawings are accepted. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: (i) With regard to page 5 (lines 5-6), the last sentence ending the paragraph, i.e., "These components are only used to distinguish one component from another" should be deleted since it is an exact duplicate of the previous sentence at page 5 (lines 4-5). (ii) With regard to page 17 (line 29), the term "FIG. 8B" should be changed to the term --FIG. 8A-- in order to remain consistent with the context of the passage and the drawings (i.e. since 820 is depicted in FIG. 8A, not FIG. 8B). (iii) With regard to page 20 (line 18), the term "the processor 1700" should be changed to the term --the processor 170-- in order to remain consistent with the specification and the drawings. Claim Objections Claims 1-7 and 9-15 are objected to because of the following informalities: (i) With regard to claim 1 (lines 8-9), the phrase "the specification information of the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information of the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (ii) With regard to claim 2 (lines 1-2), the phrase "the specification information about the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (iii) With regard to claim 3 (lines 1-2), the phrase "the specification information about the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (iv) With regard to claim 4 (lines 1-2), the phrase "the specification information about the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (v) With regard to claim 5 (lines 1-2), the phrase "the specification information about the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (vi) With regard to claim 6 (lines 1-2), the phrase "the specification information about the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (vii) With regard to claim 7 (line 2), the phrase "after specifying the parameter" should be changed to the phrase --after specifying the at least one parameter-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (viii) With regard to claim 7 (line 3), the phrase "verifying whether a natural frequency of the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- verifying whether a natural frequency of the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (ix) With regard to claim 7 (line 7), the phrase "the natural frequency of the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase --the natural frequency of the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (x) With regard to claim 9 (lines 12-13), the phrase "the specification information of the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information of the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (xi) With regard to claim 10 (line 3), the phrase "specification information about the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase --specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (xii) With regard to claim 11 (line 3), the phrase "the specification information about the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (xiii) With regard to claim 12 (line 3), the phrase "the specification information about the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (xiv) With regard to claim 13 (line 3), the phrase "the specification information about the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (xv) With regard to claim 14 (line 3), the phrase "the specification information about the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase -- the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (xvi) With regard to claim 15 (line 3), the phrase "after specifying the parameter" should be changed to the phrase --after specifying the at least one parameter-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (xvii) With regard to claim 15 (lines 3-4), the phrase "verify whether a natural frequency of the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase --verify whether a natural frequency of the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. (xviii) With regard to claim 15 (line 7), the phrase "the natural frequency of the vibration energy amplifier" should be changed to the phrase --the natural frequency of the selected vibration energy amplifier-- in order to remain consistent with the previous claim language and provide proper context. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 1-15 are 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. (i) With regard to claim 1 (line 3), the phrase (method step) "measuring a frequency of an object by coming into contact with the object" is indefinite since it fails to specify any element or structure that is being manipulated so as to come into contact with the object. Thus, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clear so as to apprise one of ordinary skill in the art the scope of such a limitation. (ii) With regard to claim 1 (lines 6-7), the phrase (method step) "loading specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier" is indefinite since it fails to specify as to where any such loading takes place, i.e., where (or to what location) the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier is loaded to. Thus, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clear so as to apprise one of ordinary skill in the art the scope of such a limitation. (iii) Additionally, since claims 2-8 depend directly or indirectly from claim 1, they too are thus rejected under the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112. (iv) Regarding claim 6 (line 4) and claim 14 (lines 4-5), the phrase "including a material having a high elastic coefficient such as stainless steel" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase "such as" are a positive feature of the claimed invention, or are simply preferences that are not required. Description of examples or preferences is properly set forth in the specification rather than the claims. If stated in the claims, examples and preferences may lead to confusion over the intended scope of a claim. See MPEP 2173.05(d). (v) With regard to claim 9 (lines 6-7), the phrase "measure . . . by coming into contact with the object" is indefinite since it fails to specify any element or structure that comes into contact with the object. Thus, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clear so as to apprise one of ordinary skill in the art the scope of such a limitation. (vi) With regard to claim 9 (lines 9-10), the phrase "load specification information about a selected vibration energy amplifier" is indefinite since it fails to specify as to where any such loading takes place, i.e., where (or to what location) the specification information about the selected vibration energy amplifier is loaded to. Thus, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clear so as to apprise one of ordinary skill in the art the scope of such a limitation. (vii) Additionally, since claims 10-15 depend directly or indirectly from claim 9, they too are thus rejected under the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112. Citation of Prior or Relevant Art on enclosed PTO-892 The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited art made of record (see the enclosed PTO-892), not applied to the rejection of the claims, supra, each disclose aspects of the claimed invention, including wherein vibration sensing devices are used to measure natural frequencies (and frequency responses) of devices - see attached PTO-892. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William J Klimowicz whose telephone number is (571)272-7577. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:00AM-6PM, ET. 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, Steven Lim can be reached at (571)270-1210. 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. /WILLIAM J KLIMOWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 27, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603103
Perpendicular Magnetic Recording Head Equipping A Spin Torque Oscillator Element With An Electric Current In Side Gaps
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603104
DISK DEVICE WITH STOPPER FOR ACTUATOR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603107
SUSPENSION ASSEMBLY AND DISK DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597441
MAGNETIC RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597439
FLEXIBLE PRINTED CIRCUIT FINGER TRACE LAYOUT FOR PARALLEL SERVO OPERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+18.5%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1284 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