Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/067,869

MAGNETIC SENSOR SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 19, 2022
Examiner
SCHINDLER, DAVID M
Art Unit
2858
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Analog Devices International Unlimited Company
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
41%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
4y 3m
To Grant
64%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 41% of resolved cases
41%
Career Allow Rate
246 granted / 599 resolved
-26.9% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 3m
Avg Prosecution
71 currently pending
Career history
670
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.6%
-38.4% vs TC avg
§103
36.0%
-4.0% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 599 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/22/2026 has been entered. No prior art is being applied against claims 1, 17, and 20 because the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “the third sinusoidal signal having a greater more than twice a number of periods per revolution than the second sinusoidal signal” as is currently, claimed, in the combination, and as best understood. 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, 2, 5-11, and 13-23 are 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. As to Claim 1, The phrases “a first incremental sensor configured to detect changes in the magnetic field as the rotatable shaft is rotated, the first incremental sensor configured to generate a second output signal comprising a second sinusoidal signal, wherein the first track of the magnetic disk is configured to influence the magnetic field at the first incremental sensor due to relative movement of the first incremental sensor and the first track, the first track introducing periodicity in the magnetic field at the first incremental sensor due to the relative movement of the first incremental sensor and the first track based on the distribution of the plurality of curved segments around the circumference of the magnetic disk, the second sinusoidal signal having a greater number of periods per revolution than the first sinusoidal signal; and a second incremental sensor configured to detect changes in the magnetic field as the rotatable shaft is rotated, the second incremental sensor configured to generate a third output signal comprising a third sinusoidal signal, wherein the second track of the magnetic disk is configured to influence the magnetic field at the second incremental sensor due to relative movement of the second incremental sensor and the second track, the second track introducing periodicity in the magnetic field at the second incremental sensor due to the relative movement of the second incremental sensor and the second track based on the distribution of the plurality of alternating structures around the circumference of the magnetic disk, the third sinusoidal signal having more than twice a number of periods per revolution than the second sinusoidal signal” on lines 17-35 lacks proper written description. At issue here is that the original disclosure is, upon further consideration, completely silent as to the manner in which these sensors are implemented, and thus the original disclosure is completely silent as to the manner in which these sensors are used for the above or configured to perform the above claim features. While specific sensors are disclosed with regard to the angle sensor and multi-turn sensor, no sensor is disclosed to be used for the above incremental sensors. Furthermore, applicant expressly requires a magnetic sensor capable of generating two different signals such that an arc-tan calculation can be performed for each sensor, in light of the disclosure. A single sensor such as a Hall sensor is not reasonably capable of generating such signals, and thus applicant must have a more specific implementation that has not reasonably been disclosed. Nowhere in the original disclosure does applicant explain what sensors are being used for the above incremental sensors, such as whether applicant is using any other disclosed sensors disclosed for the multiturn or angle sensors. Because the original disclosure is completely silent as to what sensors are being implemented for the above incremental sensors, and because applicant is not merely using any magnetic sensor for such a purpose, this phrases and any phrase that requires or references these phrases lacks proper written description. The phrase “the processing circuit being configured to: determine a first angle measurement based on the first output signal from the angle sensor; and determine a second angle measurement based on the first angle measurement, the second output signal from the first incremental sensor, and the third output signal from the second incremental sensor” on lines 37-42 lacks proper written description. At issue here is that the original disclosure is completely silent as to the manner in which the processing circuit determines the second angle measurement based upon the first angle measurement, the second output signal from the first incremental sensor, and the third output signal from the second incremental sensor as claimed. Applicant explains that the arctan calculation is used to obtain the first angle measurement, but applicant does not originally disclose the manner in which this first angle measurement is then used to obtain a second angle measurement. The original disclosure is completely silent as to the manner in which the second angle measurement is obtained based on the first angle measurement. This phrase therefore lacks proper written description. As to Claim 17, The phrases “detecting, using a first incremental sensor, changes in the magnetic field at the first incremental sensor influenced by the magnetic disk as the rotatable shaft is rotated, wherein the changes are influenced by a first track formed on the magnetic disk due to relative movement of the first incremental sensor and the first track, the first track comprising a plurality of curved segments distributed around the circumference of the magnetic disk; generating, using the first incremental sensor, a second output signal comprising a second sinusoidal signal based on the detected changes in the magnetic field at the first incremental sensor, the second sinusoidal signal having a greater number of periods per revolution than the first sinusoidal signal; detecting, using a second incremental sensor, changes in the magnetic field at the second incremental sensor influenced by the magnetic disk as the rotatable shaft is rotated, wherein the changes are influenced by a second track formed on the magnetic disk due to relative movement of the second incremental sensor and the second track, the second track formed from a plurality of alternating structures, the second track introducing periodicity in the magnetic field at the second incremental sensor due to the relative movement of the second incremental sensor and the second track based on the distribution of the plurality of alternating structures around the circumference of the magnetic disk; generating, using the second incremental sensor, a third output signal comprising a third sinusoidal signal based on the detected changes in the magnetic field at the second incremental sensor, the third sinusoidal signal having more than twice a number of periods per revolution than the second sinusoidal signal” on lines 7-27 lacks proper written description. At issue here is that the original disclosure is, upon further consideration, completely silent as to the manner in which these sensors are implemented, and thus the original disclosure is completely silent as to the manner in which these sensors are used for the above or configured to perform the above claim features. While specific sensors are disclosed with regard to the angle sensor and multi-turn sensor, no sensor is disclosed to be used for the above incremental sensors. Furthermore, applicant expressly requires a magnetic sensor capable of generating two different signals such that an arc-tan calculation can be performed for each sensor, in light of the disclosure. A single sensor such as a Hall sensor is not reasonably capable of generating such signals, and thus applicant must have a more specific implementation that has not reasonably been disclosed. Nowhere in the original disclosure does applicant explain what sensors are being used for the above incremental sensors, such as whether applicant is using any other disclosed sensors disclosed for the multiturn or angle sensors. Because the original disclosure is completely silent as to what sensors are being implemented for the above incremental sensors, and because applicant is not merely using any magnetic sensor for such a purpose, this phrases and any phrase that requires or references these phrases lacks proper written description. The phrase “determining a first angle measurement based on the first output signal from the angle sensor; and determining a second angle measurement based on the first angle measurement, the second output signal from the first incremental sensor, and the third output signal from the second incremental sensor” on lines 28-32 lacks proper written description. At issue here is that the original disclosure is completely silent as to the manner in which the processing circuit determines the second angle measurement based upon the first angle measurement, the second output signal from the first incremental sensor, and the third output signal from the second incremental sensor as claimed. Applicant explains that the arctan calculation is used to obtain the first angle measurement, but applicant does not originally disclose the manner in which this first angle measurement is then used to obtain a second angle measurement. The original disclosure is completely silent as to the manner in which the second angle measurement is obtained based on the first angle measurement. This phrase therefore lacks proper written description. As to Claim 20, The phrases “first further magnetic sensor configured to detect changes in the magnetic field influenced by a first magnetic target arranged to be rotated the rotatable shaft due to relative movement of the first further magnetic sensor and the first magnetic target, the first further magnetic sensor configured to generate a second output signal comprising a second sinusoidal signal, the first magnetic target having a first number of features for influencing the magnetic field at the first further magnetic sensor, the second sinusoidal signal having a greater number of periods per revolution than the first sinusoidal signal; a second further magnetic sensor configured to detect changes in the magnetic field influenced by a second magnetic target due to relative movement of the second further magnetic sensor and the second magnetic target, the second further magnetic sensor configured to generate a third output signal comprising a third sinusoidal signal, the second magnetic target having a plurality of alternating structures for influencing the magnetic field at the second further magnetic sensor, the second magnetic target introducing periodicity in the magnetic field at the second further magnetic sensor due to the relative movement of the second further magnetic sensor and the second magnetic target based on the distribution of the plurality of alternating structures around the second magnetic target, the third sinusoidal signal having more than twice a number of periods per revolution than the second sinusoidal signal” on lines 11-29 lacks proper written description. At issue here is that the original disclosure is, upon further consideration, completely silent as to the manner in which these sensors are implemented, and thus the original disclosure is completely silent as to the manner in which these sensors are used for the above or configured to perform the above claim features. While specific sensors are disclosed with regard to the angle sensor and multi-turn sensor, no sensor is disclosed to be used for the above magnetic sensors. Furthermore, applicant expressly requires a magnetic sensor capable of generating two different signals such that an arc-tan calculation can be performed for each sensor, in light of the disclosure. A single sensor such as a Hall sensor is not reasonably capable of generating such signals, and thus applicant must have a more specific implementation that has not reasonably been disclosed. Nowhere in the original disclosure does applicant explain what sensors are being used for the above incremental sensors, such as whether applicant is using any other disclosed sensors disclosed for the multiturn or angle sensors. Because the original disclosure is completely silent as to what sensors are being implemented for the above incremental sensors, and because applicant is not merely using any magnetic sensor for such a purpose, this phrases and any phrase that requires or references these phrases lacks proper written description. The phrase “the processing circuit being configured to: determine a first angle measurement based on the first output signal from the angle sensor; and determine a second angle measurement based on the first angle measurement, the second output signal from the first further magnetic sensor, and the third output signal from the second further magnetic sensor” on lines 31-36 lacks proper written description. At issue here is that the original disclosure is completely silent as to the manner in which the processing circuit determines the second angle measurement based upon the first angle measurement, the second output signal from the first further magnetic sensor, and the third output signal from the second further magnetic sensor as claimed. Applicant explains that the arctan calculation is used to obtain the first angle measurement, but applicant does not originally disclose the manner in which this first angle measurement is then used to obtain a second angle measurement. The original disclosure is completely silent as to the manner in which the second angle measurement is obtained based on the first angle measurement. This phrase therefore lacks proper written description. As to Claims 2, 5-11, 13-16, 18, 19, and 21-23, These claims stand rejected for incorporating and reciting the above rejected subject matter of their respective parent claim(s) and stand rejected for the same reasons. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID M. SCHINDLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2112. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm. 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, Lee Rodak can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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. DAVID M. SCHINDLER Primary Examiner Art Unit 2858 /DAVID M SCHINDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 19, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 12, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 12, 2024
Response Filed
Mar 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
May 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 24, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Oct 08, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Jan 22, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584769
INDUCTIVE POSITION SENSOR AND METHOD FOR DETECTING A MOVEMENT OF A CONDUCTIVE TARGET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578176
ANGLE SENSOR USING EDDY CURRENTS AND HAVING HARMONIC COMPENSATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12566171
DETERMINING A VOLUME OF METALLIC SWARF IN A WELLBORE FLUID
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12553961
STRAYFIELD INSENSITIVE MAGNETIC SENSING DEVICE AND METHOD USING SPIN ORBIT TORQUE EFFECT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12535339
SCALE CONFIGURATION FOR INDUCTIVE POSITION ENCODER
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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
41%
Grant Probability
64%
With Interview (+23.0%)
4y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 599 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