Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/250,189

Magnetomicrometric Advances in Robotic Control

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 21, 2023
Examiner
PATEL, NITIN
Art Unit
2628
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Massachusetts Institute Of Technology
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 2m
To Grant
66%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
143 granted / 191 resolved
+12.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -8% lift
Without
With
+-8.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 2m
Avg Prosecution
5 currently pending
Career history
196
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
37.7%
-2.3% vs TC avg
§102
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§112
8.2%
-31.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 191 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of Species IV drawn to claims 45-48, 50-59 in the reply filed on 01/13/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 1-6, 8-15, 60 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/13/2026. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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) 45,46,47,48,50, 51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58 and 59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CROSBY et al.,(US 2016/0106994) in view of Watson et al., (US 2021/0215508). As per claim 45, Crosby shows a system for estimating a physiological parameter of a muscle or a tendon, detecting muscle activation(In fig.6 element 1602), comprising: a magnetic field sensor (0020,0041,0042) configured to detect lateral vibration of at least one target implanted at a muscle or a tendon, the at least one target(In Para. 0119, 0124) comprising a controller (318 in fig.4)configured to estimate: a level of muscle activation based on the detected lateral vibration(In Para. 0124). or a muscle force based on the detected vibration, a tendon force based on the detected vibration, or a muscle-tendon unit force based on the detected vibration(In para. 0124). Crosby does not teach a magnetic material. In the same field of endeavor Watson teaches a magnetic material (0019, 0022). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention was made to combined the teaching Watson’s magnetic material with Crosby’s simulation system for monitoring relative position and motion. As per claim 46, Crosby teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a muscle force based on the detected vibration, and wherein the controller is further configured to estimate the muscle force based on the estimated level of muscle activation and a length and a velocity of the muscle(In Para.0024). As per claim 47, Crosby teaches further comprising an accelerometer at the magnetic field sensor and configured to detect vibrational movement of the magnetic field sensor relative to the target(In Para. 0106, In fig.6). As per claim 48, Crosby teaches wherein the at least one target comprises two or more targets disposed along an axis (In fig. 2A, 2B and 2C). As per claim 50 Crosby teaches wherein the controller is further configured to estimate a speed of a shear wave or a compression wave in the muscle, the tendon, a muscle-tendon unit comprising the muscle and the tendon, or surrounding tissue of the muscle-tendon unit based on a measured timing of a vibration of the at least one target relative to a timing of a perturbance applied to the target or relative to one or more additional targets implanted at the muscle or tendon(In Para 0020). As per claim 51, Crosby teaches wherein the perturbance applied includes a poke or vibration of the muscle-tendon unit or the surrounding tissue(Para 0119, 0124). As per claim 52, Crosby teaches wherein the poke or vibration includes an actuation of a magnetic bead affixed at the muscle tendon unit or the surrounding tissue by an applied magnetic field(in Para. 0105, 0106). As per claim 53, Crosby teaches wherein the applied magnetic field is supplied by an electromagnet (In para. 0106). As per claim 54, Crosby teaches wherein the electromagnet is external to the body (Para 0051). As per claim 55, Crosby teaches the controller9318) is further configured to determine a physiological property of the muscle-tendon unit based on the estimated speed of the shear wave or the compression wave(In Para 0014, 0034, 0039,0058, 0059, 0105). As per claim 56, Crosby teaches wherein the physiological property is stiffness of the muscle, the tendon, or the surrounding tissue(In Para. 0105). As per claim 57, Crosby teaches wherein the magnetic field sensor is configured to detect lateral vibration of the at least one target implanted at the muscle or the tendon (as shown in fig. 1B). As per claim 58, Crosby teaches wherein the magnetic field sensor is configured to detect movements of the target in a range of about 10 pm to about 20 pm(It is well known in the art as stated in para. 106, the controller 302 to detect any muscle contraction in user preference ranges). As per claim 59, Crosby teaches wherein the magnetic field sensor is configured to detect vibrational movement of the target at frequencies of greater than about 10 Hz (in para. 0119). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nitin Patel whose telephone number is (571)272-7677. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8.30AM-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. 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. /NITIN PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 21, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603053
PIXEL CIRCUITS AND DISPLAY DEVICE USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594172
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IMPLANTABLE MUSCLE INTERFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12575947
A PROSTHESIS COUPLING, A SOCKET COUPLING, A ROTARY CONNECTOR CORE AND A COMPLIANT MOUNTING ELEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12554358
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12539221
2 DEGREES OF FREEDOM PROSTHETIC WRIST STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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
75%
Grant Probability
66%
With Interview (-8.4%)
4y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 191 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