Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/229,425

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR REDUCING ERROR CAUSED BY ROTATIONAL MOVEMENT DURING POSITION SENSING

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Aug 02, 2023
Examiner
AURORA, REENA
Art Unit
2858
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Altronic LLC
OA Round
4 (Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allowance Rate
1043 granted / 1197 resolved
+19.1% vs TC avg
Minimal -13% lift
Without
With
+-13.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
1237
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§103
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
§102
32.5%
-7.5% vs TC avg
§112
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1197 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . This communication is in response to amendment received on 07/27/2026. Claims 1 – 20 are presented for examination. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 07/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner respectfully notes applicant’s argument that “The electronics then sum and average the output signals from the multiple sensors, counteracting the rotation-induced error. Specification, " [0030]-[0034]. A person of ordinary skill in the art would thus understand with reasonable certainty both what the "amount of error" is and how it is reflected in the output signals. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the § 112(b) rejection be withdrawn.”. However, Examiner respectfully disagrees because the limitations “The electronics then sum and average the output signals from the multiple sensors, counteracting the rotation-induced error. Specification, " [0030]-[0034]. A person of ordinary skill in the art would thus understand with reasonable certainty both what the "amount of error" is and how it is reflected in the output signals.” are not in the claim language and will therefore not be considered. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. 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 - 20 a 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. As to claims 1 and 9, it is unclear what is an amount of error and how is being determined? It is unclear how the amount of error is being determined to be included in output signals by rotation of the magnetic rod about the axis? Claims 2 – 8 and 17 - 18 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1. Claims 10 – 16 and 19 - 20 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 9. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 REENA AURORA whose telephone number is (571)272-2263. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00AM-5:00PM. 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, Lee Rodak can be reached at 5712705628. 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. /REENA AURORA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 1 earlier event
Apr 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Sep 23, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 29, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Mar 30, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jul 27, 2026
Response Filed
Oct 01, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12770844
PLASMA DIAGNOSIS DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF PLASMA DIAGNOSIS DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12761293
THREE-DIMENSIONAL MAGNETIC FIELD MEASUREMENT DEVICE AND MAGNETIC FIELD MAPPING SYSTEM
2y 11m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12763573
JOINT FAULT DETECTION AND COMMUNICATION FOR DC POWER LINES
2y 3m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12761262
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR ANALYSING DEFECTS BY MEANS OF REFLECTOMETRY USING A TRANSFER FUNCTION ESTIMATION
2y 1m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12754198
SENSOR HAVING LOW POWER MOVEMENT DETECTION
2y 9m to grant Granted Oct 06, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (-13.3%)
2y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1197 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