Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/189,777

Ultrasonic Transducer

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 24, 2023
Examiner
ROSENAU, DEREK JOHN
Art Unit
2837
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Krohne AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
951 granted / 1229 resolved
+9.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1263
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
50.8%
+10.8% vs TC avg
§102
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
§112
17.1%
-22.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1229 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 . 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. Claims 1-3, 5, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (CN 101596522). With respect to claim 1, Chen et al. discloses an ultrasonic transducer (Fig 1) for an ultrasonic flowmeter (this is merely a statement of intended use with no accompanying structure, and therefore does not further limit the structural features of the ultrasonic transducer), comprising at least one piezoelectric transducer element (item 5), a first holding element (item 9); a second holding element (item 4), wherein the at least one piezoelectric transducer element is arranged between the first holding element and the second holding element (Fig 1), wherein the first holding element, the at least one piezoelectric transducer element and the second holding element are arranged one behind the other along a longitudinal axis of the ultrasonic transducer (Fig 1), wherein at least one pre-tensioning element (item 10) is provided on the side of the first holding element facing away from the piezoelectric transducer element (Fig 1), wherein a connecting element (item 3) is provided on the side of the pre-tensioning element facing away from the first holding element (Fig 1), wherein the connecting element serves to preload the pre-tensioning element and is connected to the second holding element (Fig 1), wherein, in the loaded state of the pre-tensioning element, a force acts on the first holding element and, via the connecting element, on the second holding element in such a way that the first holding element and the second holding element clamp the at least one piezoelectric transducer element (Fig 1). With respect to claim 2, Chen et al. discloses the ultrasonic transducer according to claim 1, wherein the pre-tensioning element is designed in the first holding element, and wherein the pre-tensioning element is implemented by a material reduction of the first holding element (Fig 1, wherein the claim does not specify a starting state for the “reduction” of material). The language “implemented by a reduction in material of the first holding element” is product-by-process language. It has been held that where a claimed product is the same as or obvious over a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even if the prior product was made by a different process (In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964). With respect to claim 3, Chen et al. discloses the ultrasonic transducer according to claim 1, wherein the pre-tensioning element is designed as a compression spring, disc spring, wave spring or plate spring (Fig 1). With respect to claim 5, Chen et al. discloses the ultrasonic transducer according to claim 1, wherein the connecting element is implemented by a sleeve, wherein the sleeve can be connected to the second holding element via additional fastening elements or the sleeve can be screwed onto the second holding element, so that the pre-tensioning element is brought into the loaded state by the latching or by the screwing on of the sleeve (Fig 1). With respect to claim 7, Chen et al. discloses the ultrasonic transducer according to claim 1, wherein the connecting element is implemented by a connecting rod (shaft of bolt 3) and a nut (item 11), that the connecting rod is connected to the second holding element (Fig 1), that the pre-tensioning element, the first holding element and the at least one piezoelectric transducer element each have a recess through which the connecting rod is passed (Fig 1), that, at its end facing away from the second holding element, the connecting rod has a thread onto which the nut can be screwed (Fig 1), and that the pre-tensioning element is brought into the loaded state by screwing the nut onto the connecting rod (Fig 1). With respect to claim 8, Chen et al. discloses the ultrasonic transducer according to claim 7, wherein the connecting rod is non-detachably connected to the second holding element, in particular is welded to the second holding element or is designed integrally with the second holding element (Fig 1). With respect to claim 9, Chen et al. discloses the ultrasonic transducer according to claim 7, wherein the connecting rod is detachably connected to the second holding element, in particular by a screw connection, a snap-in connection or a bayonet connection (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. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. With respect to claim 4, Chen et al. discloses the ultrasonic transducer according to claim 1. Chen et al. does not disclose that at least one second pre-tensioning element is provided, wherein the first pre-tensioning element and the second pre-tensioning element are arranged adjacent to one another in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the ultrasonic transducer, wherein the first pre-tensioning element and the second pre-tensioning element are designed identically. However, it has been held that the mere duplication of parts for multiple effect is obvious (In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378). It would therefore be obvious to provide additional pre-tensioning springs along the longitudinal axis of the device of Chen et al. in order to provide additional pre-tensioning force along the stack. The result is at least one second pre-tensioning element is provided, wherein the first pre-tensioning element and the second pre-tensioning element are arranged adjacent to one another in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the ultrasonic transducer, wherein the first pre-tensioning element and the second pre-tensioning element are designed identically. Before the effective filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide additional pre-tensioning element(s) for the device of Chen et al. as it has been held that the mere duplication of parts for multiple effect is obvious (In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378), and for the benefit of providing additional pre-tensioning force along the stack. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose or suggest “wherein the connecting element is designed in a T-shape with a T- roof and a T-bar, wherein the T-shaped connecting element has a thread at an end of the T-bar facing away from the T-roof, wherein the second holding element has a connecting-element receptacle with a corresponding mating thread, wherein the pre-tensioning element, the first holding element and the at least one piezoelectric transducer element each have a recess through which the T-bar of the T-shaped connecting element is passed, and wherein the pre-tensioning element is brought into the loaded state by screwing the T-shaped connecting element into the second holding element” in combination with the remaining elements of claim 6. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Derek John Rosenau whose telephone number is (571)272-8932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7 am to 5:30 pm Central Time. 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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571) 270-7938. 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. /DEREK J ROSENAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 24, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603629
COMPOSITE STRUCTURE AND ASSOCIATED PRODUCTION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597906
DOPED CRYSTALLINE PIEZOELECTRIC RESONATOR FILMS AND METHODS OF FORMING DOPED SINGLE CRYSTALLINE PIEZOELECTRIC RESONATOR LAYERS ON SUBSTRATES VIA EPITAXY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593611
RESERVOIR ELEMENT AND NEUROMORPHIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592676
RESONATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587162
ACOUSTIC WAVE DEVICE
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+8.2%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1229 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