Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/230,646

Measuring Distance Traversed or Speed

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Aug 06, 2023
Examiner
AURORA, REENA
Art Unit
2858
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Astra Navigation, Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
73%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
1010 granted / 1161 resolved
+19.0% vs TC avg
Minimal -14% lift
Without
With
+-14.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
1191
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
25.3%
-14.7% vs TC avg
§102
34.0%
-6.0% vs TC avg
§112
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1161 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 RCE received on 01/13/2026. Applicant has added new claims 31 – 36. Claims 1 – 36 are presented for examination. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 - 36 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. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1 - 36 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 - 30 of U.S. Patent No. 11,719,716. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the scope of claims 1 - 36 of an instant application encompasses the boundaries of the claims 1 – 30 (patents claim). The claims in the instant application define an invention that is merely an obvious variation of an invention claimed in the patent. Claims 1 - 36 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 - 30 of copending Application No. 17/743,353 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the scope of claims of an instant application encompasses the boundaries of the claims (reference application). The claims in the instant application define an invention that is merely an obvious variation of an invention claimed in the reference application. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Prior Art of Record The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant s disclosure. Howard (11,644,297) is cited for its disclosure of a three-dimensional position sensor systems and methods. Stetson (8,311,767) is cited for its disclosure of magnetic navigation system. 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

Aug 06, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 20, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
May 31, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 23, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 30, 2025
Final Rejection — §DP
Jan 13, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 24, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601613
SENSOR ARRANGEMENT HAVING A DUAL MAGNET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601794
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING AN ORIENTATION OF A MAGNET, AND A JOYSTICK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601763
CURRENT SENSOR WITH ADJACENT CONDUCTOR REJECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596335
RELAY DRIVE SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596160
MAGNETIC SENSING DEVICE AND MAGNETIC SENSING METHOD
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
73%
With Interview (-14.1%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1161 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