Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/202,819

SELF-ADAPTING ANALOG CIRCUIT DESIGN METHOD AND SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
May 26, 2023
Examiner
PARIHAR, SUCHIN
Art Unit
2851
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Analog Intelligent Design Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
1024 granted / 1167 resolved
+19.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
1181
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
§103
21.3%
-18.7% vs TC avg
§102
70.9%
+30.9% vs TC avg
§112
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1167 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 2. This Non-Final office action is in response to application 18/202,819, application filed on 05/26/2023. Claims 1-14 are currently pending in this application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 3. 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. 4. Claims 1, 2, 5, 10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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. 5. With respect to claims 1, 2, 5, 10 and 12-13, said claims recite the term, “dominant components”. This term is indefinite with respect to its intended meaning, as the disclosure fails to describe with specificity, or metes and bounds, what is the meaning of “dominant components”. For example, the disclosure is silent to which components are dominant vs which components are not dominant. Further, Applicant fails to describe “dominant components” in such a way as to ascertain an equivalence in the art. Thus, Applicant is required to address this language upon response to this office action. 6. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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. 7. With respect to claim 3, said claims recite the term, “L1norm, or L2norm, or r2”. This phrase is indefinite with respect to its intended meaning, as the disclosure fails to describe with specificity, or metes and bounds, what is the meaning of “L1norm, or L2norm, or r2”. Further, Applicant fails to describe “L1norm, or L2norm, or r2” in such a way as to ascertain an equivalence in the art. Thus, Applicant is required to address this language upon response to this office action. Allowable Subject Matter 8. Independent claims 1 and 13 might be considered as containing allowable subject matter 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, as the prior art of record appears to fail to teach the particular combination of limitations as recited in each of independent claims 1 and 13. 9. Claims 4, 6-7, 9, 11 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if: (1) rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims; and (2) 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, as the prior art of record appears to fail to teach the particular combination of limitations as recited in each of claims 4, 6-7, 9 and 11, respectively Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUCHIN PARIHAR whose telephone number is (703)756-1970. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-5pm. 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, Jack Chiang can be reached on 571-272-7483. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding 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. /SUCHIN PARIHAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2851
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 26, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12683411
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR CHARGING FOR DEVICE IDENTIFICATION, ADDITION AND/OR CHANGE
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12682143
IDENTIFYING RTL CODE THAT CAN BE A SOURCE OF VERIFICATION COMPLEXITY FOR DOWNSTREAM EQUIVALENCE CHECKERS AND GENERATING RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE RUNTIME OF EQUIVALENCE CHECKERS
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12675623
TIMING OPTIMIZATION METHOD AND APPARATUS BASED ON OUTPUT TRANSITION CONSTRAINTS, AND COMPUTER DEVICE
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12662008
Electric Vehicle Charging System
3y 10m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12645856
CREATION OF REDUCED FORMAL MODEL FOR SCALABLE SYSTEM-ON-CHIP (SOC) LEVEL CONNECTIVITY VERIFICATION
3y 5m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+8.9%)
2y 4m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1167 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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