Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/216,574

OVERCURRENT PROTECTION CIRCUIT AND POWER AMPLIFIER INCLUDING OVERCURRENT PROTECTION CIRCUIT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 29, 2023
Examiner
CHOE, HENRY
Art Unit
2843
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
65%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
1238 granted / 1339 resolved
+24.5% vs TC avg
Minimal -27% lift
Without
With
+-27.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1368
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
37.4%
-2.6% vs TC avg
§102
47.1%
+7.1% vs TC avg
§112
3.8%
-36.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1339 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. Claim(s) 1 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by [Andrys et al (Fig. 5); 9,698,853]. Regarding claim 1, Andrys et al discloses an amplifier circuit comprising a variable voltage source (520) configured to generate a first voltage (output voltage signal of 520) which varies in response to a variable current (the current source in 520), an amplifier (530) comprising a first input terminal (- input terminal of 530) to which the first voltage (output voltage signal of 520) is applied, and a limit current source (404) connected to a second input terminal (+ input terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530) and configured to generate a limit current (Ib_clamp) corresponding to the first voltage (output voltage signal of 520). Regarding claim 16, Andrys et al discloses an amplifier circuit comprising a variable voltage source (520) configured to generate a first voltage (output voltage signal of 520) which varies in response to a variable current (the current source in 520), an amplifier (530) comprising a first input terminal (- input terminal of 530) to which the first voltage (output voltage signal of 520) is applied, and a limit current source (404) configured to generate a limit current (the current flowing out of the drain terminal of the transistor 512) corresponding to the first voltage (output voltage signal of 520), and apply a voltage (voltage present at the drain terminal of the transistor 512) corresponding to the limit current (the current flowing out of the drain terminal of the transistor 512) to a second input terminal (+ input terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530). 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(s) 2-5, 7-9 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Andrys et al (Fig. 5); 9,698,853] in view of [Ohta et al (Fig. 2); 8,183,925]. Regarding claims 2 and 17, Andrys et al discloses all the limitations in claim 2 as described above except for the internal structure of the variable voltage source. Ohta et al discloses an amplifier circuit comprising the variable voltage source (420b) comprises a first transistor (422b) and a second transistor (423b) connected to each other in a current mirror configuration, a variable current source (421b) connected between a first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 422b) of the first transistor (422b) and a ground (ground) and configured to generate the variable current, and a first resistor (424b) connected between a first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 423b) of the second transistor (423b) and the ground (ground). It would have been obvious to substitute Ohta et al’s variable voltage source (420b in Fig. 2 of Ohta et al) in place of Andrys et al’s variable voltage source (520 in Fig. 5 of Andrys et al) since Andrys et al discloses a generic variable voltage source thereby suggesting that any equivalent variable voltage source would have been usable in Andrys et al’s reference. Regarding claims 3 and 18, wherein a voltage of the first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 423b) of the second transistor (423b) is the first voltage (output voltage signal of 520). Regarding claim 4, wherein the limit current source (404) is connected to an output terminal (output terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530), and a voltage of the output terminal (output terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530) is a second voltage (output voltage of 530) that varies in response to the variable current (the current source in 520). Regarding claims 5 and 19, wherein the limit current source (404) comprises a first transistor (512) comprising a control terminal (gate terminal of 512) to which the second voltage (output voltage of 530) is applied, a first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 512) connected to the second input terminal (+ input terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530), a first resistor (513) connected between the first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 512) of the first transistor (512) and a ground (ground), and a second transistor (511a) comprising a control terminal (gate terminal of the transistor 511a) to which the second voltage (output voltage signal of 530) is applied and a first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 511a) which outputs the limit current (Ib_clamp). Regarding claim 7, wherein the limit current (Ib_clamp) varies in response to the first voltage (output voltage signal of 520) and the second voltage (output voltage of 530). Regarding claim 8, wherein the limit current (Ib_clamp) is generated to be supplied to a bias circuit configured to bias a power transistor (PA FINAL STAGE). Regarding claim 9, wherein the amplifier (530) is an operational amplifier and the first input terminal (- input terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530) is an inverting terminal of the operational amplifier (530), and the second input terminal (+ input terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530) is a non-inverting terminal of the operational amplifier (530). Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Kocer et al (Fig. 1); 8,319,560] in view of [Andrys et al (Fig. 5); 9,698,853]. Kocer et al discloses an amplifier circuit comprising a power transistor (14), a bias circuit (18) configured to supply a bias current (output signal of 18) to the power transistor (14), and an overcurrent protection circuit (16) configured to supply a limit current (output signal of 16) to the bias circuit (18) to prevent an overcurrent from flowing in the power transistor (14). As described above, Kocer et al discloses all the limitations in claim 10 except for that the internal structures of the overcurrent protection circuit. Andrys et al discloses an amplifier circuit comprising a variable voltage source (520) configured to generate a first voltage (output voltage signal of 520) which varies in response to a variable current (the current source in 520), an amplifier (530) comprising a first input terminal (- input terminal of 530) to which the first voltage (output voltage signal of 520) is applied, and a limit current source (404) connected to a second input terminal (+ input terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530) and configured to generate a limit current (Ib_clamp) corresponding to the first voltage (output voltage signal of 520). It would have been obvious to substitute Andrys et al’s overcurrent protection circuit in place of Kocer et al’s overcurrent protection circuit (16 in Fig. 1 of Kocer et al) since Kocer et al discloses a generic overcurrent protection circuit thereby suggesting that any equivalent overcurrent protection circuit would have been usable in Kocer et al’s reference. Claim(s) 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Kocer et al (Fig. 1); 8,319,560] in view of [Andrys et al (Fig. 5); 9,698,853] in further view of [Ohta et al (Fig. 2); 8,183,925]. Regarding claim 11, Kocer et al in view of Andrys et al discloses all the limitations in claim 11 except for that the internal structures of the variable voltage source. Ohta et al discloses an amplifier circuit comprising the variable voltage source (420b) comprises a first transistor (422b) and a second transistor (423b) connected to each other in a current mirror configuration, a variable current source (421b) connected between a first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 422b) of the first transistor (422b) and a ground (ground) and configured to generate the variable current, and a first resistor (424b) connected between a first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 423b) of the second transistor (423b) and the ground (ground). It would have been obvious to substitute Ohta et al’s variable voltage source (420b in Fig. 2 of Ohta et al) in place of Andrys et al’s variable voltage source (520 in Fig. 5 of Andrys et al) since Andrys et al discloses a generic variable voltage source thereby suggesting that any equivalent variable voltage source would have been usable in Andrys et al’s reference. Regarding claim 12, wherein the limit current source (404) is connected to an output terminal (output terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530), and a voltage of the output terminal (output terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530) is a second voltage (output voltage of 530) that varies in response to the variable current (the current source in 520). Regarding claim 13, wherein the limit current source (404) comprises a first transistor (512) comprising a control terminal (gate terminal of 512) to which the second voltage (output voltage of 530) is applied, a first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 512) connected to the second input terminal (+ input terminal of 530) of the amplifier (530), a first resistor (513) connected between the first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 512) of the first transistor (512) and a ground (ground), and a second transistor (511a) comprising a control terminal (gate terminal of the transistor 511a) to which the second voltage (output voltage signal of 530) is applied and a first terminal (drain terminal of the transistor 511a) which outputs the limit current (Ib_clamp). Regarding claim 15, wherein the limit current (Ib_clamp) varies in response to the first voltage (output voltage signal of 520) and the second voltage (output voltage of 530). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6, 14 and 20 are 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Henry Choe whose telephone number is (703)774-4614. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00 AM- 6:00 PM EST. 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/interview practice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrea J Lindgren Baltzell can be reached on (571)272-5918. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. /HENRY CHOE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2843 #2928 .
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 29, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603612
POWER SUPPLY CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603625
STACKED DIGITAL CURRENT STEERING AUTOMATIC GAIN CONTROL ATTENUATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597890
OVER TEMPERATURE PROTECTION OF LDO CONTROLLING THE RF POWER AMPLIFIER COLLECTOR VOLTAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597893
SEMICONDUCTOR INTEGRATED CIRCUIT AND RADIO-FREQUENCY MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597888
ADAPTIVE STABILIZATION AND/OR PERFORMANCE OPTIMIZATION OF POWER AMPLIFIERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
92%
Grant Probability
65%
With Interview (-27.4%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1339 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