Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/153,033

MOTOR DRIVE DEVICE, MOTOR SYSTEM AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jan 11, 2023
Examiner
PHAM, LEDA T
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Rohm Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
729 granted / 981 resolved
+6.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1017
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
50.2%
+10.2% vs TC avg
§102
31.0%
-9.0% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 981 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/10/25 is being considered by the examiner. Response to Amendment This office action is in response to amendment filed on 11/04/25. Regarding the amendment, claims 1-20 are present for examination. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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. Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zeng (CN 113452291 A). Regarding claim 1, Zeng teaches motor a drive device (fig 1), comprising: a terminal configured to receive a Hall signal (IN1) output from a Hall sensor (160); a logic unit (150) configured to generate a control signal (C3) based on the Hall signal (IN1); a drive unit (100) configured to generate a driving signal (IL) based on the control signal (C3); and a determination unit (130) configured to determine a voltage level of the Hall signal (IN1) with respect to a threshold voltage (Vr), wherein the logic unit (150) is configured to switch a function setting based on a determination result of the determination unit (130), and wherein the threshold voltage (Vr) is based on a constant voltage (page 3 para. 2-3). Regarding claim 3, Zeng teaches the logic unit (150), when the determination result of the determination unit (130) is same for a predetermined number of consecutive times, switches the function setting based on the determination result (page 3, para 2-3). Regarding claims 5 and 7, Zeng teaches the function setting is a setting of a number of output pulses of a rotational frequency detection signal (page 3 para 2-3). Regarding claims 9 and 11, Zeng teaches the function setting is a setting of a direction of rotation (page 3). Regarding claims 13, 15-17, Zeng teaches a motor system (fig 1), comprising a motor drive device (10); the Hall sensor (160); and a motor (L) configured to be driven by the motor drive device. Regarding claim 18, Zeng teaches a bias voltage of a Hall signal (IN1) is set to be out of a prohibited area including a threshold value of a level determination (page 3 teaches a bias voltage is applied to the hall signal IN1, and there is no particular difficulty in setting the bias voltage of the hall signal outside the prohibited area including the threshold value of the level determination in order to avoid malfunction when the level determination is performed by the comparator 130). Regarding claims 19-20, Zeng teaches an electronic device, comprising the motor system (fig 1). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng in view of Yamato (JP 2017/175841 A). Regarding claim 2, Zeng teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, except for the added limitation of an undervoltage-lockout (UVLO) unit configured to monitor a power supply voltage supplied to the motor drive device and release a UVLO when the power supply voltage reaches a predetermined UVLO release voltage, wherein the logic unit is configured to switch the function setting based on the determination result after the UVLO is canceled by the UVLO unit. Yamato teaches a motor drive device having an undervoltage-lockout (UVLO) unit (15), configured to monitor a power supply voltage supplied to the motor drive device (X) and release a UVLO when the power supply voltage reaches a predetermined UVLO release voltage, wherein the logic unit (12) is configured to switch the function setting based on the determination result after the UVLO is canceled by the UVLO unit (para. 7, page 2) to suppress the rotational frequency when the detection result of the rotational frequency exceeds the set rotational frequency (abs). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zeng’s motor system with an undervoltage-lockout (UVLO) unit configured to monitor a power supply voltage supplied to the motor drive device and release a UVLO when the power supply voltage reaches a predetermined UVLO release voltage, wherein the logic unit is configured to switch the function setting based on the determination result after the UVLO is canceled by the UVLO unit as taught by Yamato. Doing so would suppress the rotational frequency when the detection result of the rotational frequency exceeds the set rotational frequency (abs). Regarding claim 4, Zeng in view of Yamato teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 2, Zeng further teaches the logic unit (150), when the determination result of the determination unit (130) is same for a predetermined number of consecutive times, switches the function setting based on the determination result (page 3, para 2-3). Regarding claims 6 and 8, Zeng in view of Yamato teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claims 2 and 4, Zeng further teaches the function setting is a setting of a number of output pulses of a rotational frequency detection signal (page 3 para 2-3). Regarding claims 10 and 12, Zeng in view of Yamato teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claims 2 and 4, Zeng further teaches the function setting is a setting of a direction of rotation (page 3). Regarding claim 14, Zeng in view of Yamato teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 2, Zeng further teaches a motor system (fig 1), comprising a motor drive device (10); the Hall sensor (160); and a motor (L) configured to be driven by the motor drive device. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Matsuda (US 2020/0091843 A1) teaches a motor control device controls a brushless motor including a rotor with a magnet, and a stator including multi-phase wound coils. In the motor control device, a rotational-direction detector detects a rotational direction of the brushless motor, in accordance with a hall signal detected by a hall-signal detector and a phase current detected by a phase-current detector at timing when at least one transistor is set in an energizable state. Kawada et al. (US 6,836,085 B2) teaches an electric vehicle which is so constituted as to drive a synchronous motor by way of a switch and an inverter circuit. A battery acts as a source of driving a controlling power. The synchronous motor has a permanent magnet acting as an outer rotor. The method includes the following operations of: 1) detecting that the electric vehicle has an acceleration signal of zero; 2) detecting that an actual speed of the electric vehicle is less than a predetermined percent of a rated speed; 3) supplying a current to a winding of a fixed phase of the synchronous motor, by way of the inverter circuit; and 4) generating a braking force. 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 LEDA T PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-5806. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00. 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 M Koehler can be reached at (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. /LEDA T PHAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 11, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 04, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 29, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603535
FLUID DRIVING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603534
ELECTRIC MACHINE INCLUDING FIELD COIL SEPARATORS HAVING AN INTEGRATED COOLANT FLOW PATH
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603554
Systems, Assemblies, and Methods Associated with a Replaceable Motor Controller
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597822
STATOR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587053
Stator For Electric Machine and Method of Manufacturing Said Stator
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+11.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 981 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