Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/149,474

WIRELESS CHARGING RECEIVER AND WIRELESS CHARGING SYSTEM COMPRISING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jan 03, 2023
Examiner
TSO, EDWARD H
Art Unit
2859
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
1098 granted / 1260 resolved
+19.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1297
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
§103
28.8%
-11.2% vs TC avg
§102
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1260 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The IDSes filed 01/03/23 and 8/31/23 have both been considered and placed of record. The initialed copies are attached herewith. Specification The disclosure should be carefully reviewed to ensure that any and all grammatical, idiomatic, and spelling or other minor errors are corrected. For example, the abstract should avoid using legal phraseology such as “comprising” often used in patent claims. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. In addition, legal phraseology such as “comprising” should be avoided in the title. Drawings The drawings filed 1/3/23 have no defects. Claim Objections Claims 1-14 and 15-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Re claims 1 and 15, the label “n1” in the limitation “first node n1” in the penultimate line should be deleted for consistency with the other claims because the same limitation “first node” in claim 8 does not have the label. Moreover, the limitation “a second node” does not have the label in the same set of claims. Re claims 2-14 and 16-20, they are objected for depending directly or indirectly on objected claims. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-14 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. Re claim 1, the limitation “wireless charging transmitter” on line 3 is confusing because the same limitation has already introduced in line 2. Adding the article “the” to said limitation would resolve the issue. Re claims 2-5, they are indefinite for depending directly or indirectly to rejected claims. Re claim 6, the limitation “the second ac signal is a same signal as the first ac signal” on the last line is confusing because if the ac signal in the first node is the first ac signal, the second ac signal received in the second node that is different from the first node, then the first ac signal and the second ac signal are not same. Re claim 7, the claim is indefinite for depending on indefinite claim 1. Re claim 8, the claim starts out with “configured to” instead of the standard claim phraseology such as “comprising,” “consisting,” or “including.” The phrase “configured to…” is merely expressed an intended use and that other limitations including the “wireless charging transmitter” and the “first capacitor” are not positively claimed. Moreover, it is unclear where the common voltage is generated from (which seems to be an important feature of the wireless charging receiver; other claims have the common voltage generated from the dc-dc converter). Re claims 9-14, they are indefinite for depending directly or indirectly on indefinite claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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 1-4, 7, 15-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kohout (US 2015/0098162). Re claim 1, the reference discloses, inter alia, a wireless charging receiver 79 configured to wirelessly receive electrical power from a wireless charging transmitter 65, the wireless charging receiver 79 comprising: an inductor 74 configured to be inductively coupled to wireless charging transmitter 65 (via 64) (fig 2); a rectifier 140 connected to the inductor 74 (fig 3), the rectifier 140 configured to rectify a signal received from the inductor (fig 3); a DC-DC converter configured to convert a DC signal received from the rectifier (fig 3, para 48: five-volt load output circuit 180 is connected to the rectified output terminal 115 and a 5V-load output terminal 118); a switching block configured to receive a common voltage generated from the DC- DC converter and the switching block including a first switch (fig 6, para 62: bootstrap 1309 (fig 6 shows as 1300) shows diode 132 and first/second switch 135/136 receiving the 5V common voltage); and a first capacitor 105 configured to receive the common voltage (the 5V) from the switching block (1300 of fig 6 or 1309 in para 62), the first capacitor 105 connected to the inductor 74 at a first node n1 (fig 6: bottom line of inductor 74), wherein the common voltage is not zero (fig 6: the 5V). Re claim 2, the reference further discloses a second capacitor 106 connected to the inductor 74, the second capacitor further connected to a second node that is different from the first node (fig 6: second capacitor 106 connected to the top line while the first capacitor 105 connected to the bottom line, both connected at different nodes), wherein the switching block further includes a second switch 136, wherein the second capacitor is connected to the second switch 136, and wherein the second switch 136 is configured to forward the common voltage to the second capacitor 136 (fig 6). Re claim 3, the reference further discloses a receive controller 1501 configured to control the switch block (fig 6, para 62: A signal OVP 129 is asserted when the OVP control circuit 1501 detects overvoltage…also turns off bootstrap switches 135,136). Re claim 4, the reference further discloses the receive controller 1501 is configured to control the common voltage (the 5V) to be forwarded to the first capacitor 105 from a first time period to a second time period as the first switch 135 is closed from the first time period to the second time period (fig 6, para 62: signal OVP 129 drives the bootstrap switches 135, 136. When signal OVP 129 is asserted, it turns on switches 121, 122… is also turned off switches 135, 136… When signal OVP 129 is deasserted, bootstrap switches 135, 136 are turned on). Re claim 7, the reference further discloses the first switch 135 is a transistor (fig 6). Re claim 15, the reference discloses a wireless charging system (fig 2), inter alia, a wireless charging transmitter 65 configured to generate charging electrical power; and a wireless charging receiver 79 configured to wirelessly receive the charging electrical power from the wireless charging transmitter 65, wherein the wireless charging receiver 79 includes an inductor 74 inductively coupled to the wireless charging transmitter 65, a rectifier 140 (fig 3) connected to the inductor 74, the rectifier configured to rectify a signal received from the inductor (fig 3), a DC-DC converter configured to convert a DC signal received from the rectifier (fig 3, para 48: five-volt load output circuit 180 is connected to the rectified output terminal 115 and a 5V-load output terminal 118), a switching block configured to receive a common voltage generated from the DC-DC converter and the switching block including a first switch (fig 6, para 62: bootstrap 1309 (fig 6 shows as 1300) shows diode 132 and first/second switch 135/136 receiving the 5V common voltage), and a first capacitor 105 configured to receive the common voltage (the 5V) from the switching block (1300 of fig 6 or 1309 in para 62), the first capacitor 105 connected to the inductor 74 at a first node n1 (fig 6: bottom line of inductor 74), wherein the common voltage is not zero (fig 6: the 5V). Re claim 16, the reference further discloses a second capacitor 106 connected to the inductor 74, the second capacitor further connected to a second node that is different from the first node (fig 6: second capacitor 106 connected to the top line while the first capacitor 105 connected to the bottom line, both connected at different nodes), wherein the switching block further includes a second switch 136, wherein the second capacitor is connected to the second switch 136, and wherein the second switch 136 is configured to forward the common voltage to the second capacitor 136 (fig 6). Re claim 17, the reference further discloses a receive controller 1501 configured to control the switch block (fig 6, para 62: A signal OVP 129 is asserted when the OVP control circuit 1501 detects overvoltage…also turns off bootstrap switches 135,136). Re claim 18, the reference further discloses the receive controller 1501 is configured to control the common voltage (the 5V) to be forwarded to the first capacitor 105 from a first time period to a second time period as the first switch 135 is closed from the first time period to the second time period (fig 6, para 62: signal OVP 129 drives the bootstrap switches 135, 136. When signal OVP 129 is asserted, it turns on switches 121, 122… is also turned off switches 135, 136… When signal OVP 129 is deasserted, bootstrap switches 135, 136 are turned on). Re claim 20, the reference further discloses the first switch 135 is a transistor (fig 6). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 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 5, 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kohout (US 2015/0098162). Re claims 5 and 19, the reference discloses the signal at the first node is a first ac signal (fig 6: capacitor 105 intersects inductor 74). However, the reference is silent on the specific magnitude of the common voltage being ½ the maximum value of the first ac signal. Official notice is taken that selecting various voltage magnitudes from among a plural voltage magnitudes would allow for a well-tuned system. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have selected any appropriate value including the claimed value, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Re claim 6, the reference discloses the signal at the first node is a first ac signal (fig 6: capacitor 105 intersects inductor 74). The reference is silent on the specific magnitude of the common voltage being ½ the maximum value of the first ac signal. Official notice is taken that selecting various voltage magnitudes from among a plural voltage magnitudes would allow for a well-tuned system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have selected any appropriate value including the claimed value, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. The reference is further silent on having the second ac signal received at the second node is different from the first node; and the second ac signal is same as the first ac signal. Official notice is taken that selecting various ac signals (same or different) from among a plurality of ac signal values would allow for a better interacting between the transmitter and receiver to reduce noise. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have selected any appropriate value including the claimed value, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 8-14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Art made of record fails to disclose or suggest at least a wireless charging receiver, among other claimed allowable features, transmitting the ac signal, of which amplitude is modulated, to the wireless charging transmitter; and removing noise of an audible frequency band that is included in the ac signal of which amplitude is modulated. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2013/0147279, US 2021/0184502 and US 2023/0283115 all teach a wireless power system with rectification and improved modulation. KR 10-2023-0038572 teaches multiple transmitters pairing up with multiple receivers to ensure proper frequency matching. Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to the Examiner at the below-listed number. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu from 7:00am-7:00pm. The Examiner’s SPE is Drew Dunn and he can be reached at 571.272.2312. The fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is 571.273.8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.217.9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800.786.9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571.272.1000. /EDWARD TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 571.272.2087
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 03, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Mar 05, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 05, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603523
ELECTRONIC CHARGING SHELF SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597782
CHARGER INCLUDING MULTIPLE ADJUSTABLE POWER SOURCES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597787
DATA LINE AND CHARGING DEVICE WITH SWITCHABLE CONFIGURATION CHANNEL CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587022
A BATTERY STORAGE SYSTEM WITH MULTI-LEVEL CONVERTER AND MULTIPLE STORAGE SECTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580418
GROUND ASSEMBLY FOR AN INDUCTIVE CHARGING DEVICE
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+6.1%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1260 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