Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/298,253

Device and Method for Controlling a Physical Indicator of an Ambient Electromagnetic Power Harvesting Device

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 10, 2023
Examiner
MCCORMACK, THOMAS S
Art Unit
2686
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
T-Mobile Innovations LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
545 granted / 683 resolved
+17.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
703
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.4%
-35.6% vs TC avg
§103
60.4%
+20.4% vs TC avg
§102
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
§112
7.8%
-32.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 683 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-8, 13-14, and 18-20 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. 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. Claims 1, 2, 5, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US Pub No. 2010/0171586) and Conner et al. (US Pub No. 2014/0144994). Regarding claim 1, Park teaches an indicator ambient electromagnetic power harvesting (AEPH) device (See abstract), comprising: an antenna (See abstract); an AEPH circuit coupled to the antenna and configured to receive radio frequency (RF) signals (See abstract, [0038], and Fig. 1, 110- antenna); a controller configured to receive electrical power from the AEPH circuit and an RF signal from the antenna (See abstract, [0038], and Fig. 1, 130- controller); a physical indicator configured to be controlled by the controller (See abstract, [0026], [0037], and Fig. 1, 190- LED); and an indicator control data (ICD) memory coupled to the controller (See abstract, Fig. 1, and [0037]-[0038]), wherein the controller is configured to: receive information from an RF signal received via the antenna, the information comprising interrogation data (See [0012] and [0063]); compare data stored in the ICD memory with the interrogation data to generate comparison information (See [0012] and [0063]); and cause the physical indicator to emit a physical signal, based on the comparison information (See [0012] and [0063]). Park does not teach a substrate or is configured to receive radio frequency (RF) energy collected by the antenna and to convert the RF energy into electrical power Conner teaches a substrate and configured to receive radio frequency (RF) energy collected by the antenna and to convert the RF energy into electrical power (See [0003]-[0004], Fig. 1, and abstract). One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have been motivated to modify Park’s devices to include Conner’s teachings for a lower cost RFID tag. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. Regarding claim 2, Park teaches the physical indicator is a light-emitting device and the physical signal comprises light emitted by the light-emitting device (See abstract, Fig. 1, and [0067]). Regarding claim 5, Park teaches the physical indicator is a light-emitting device comprising a plurality of emitters, the physical signal comprises light emitted by a selected number of emitters of the plurality of emitters, and the selected number is based on the comparison information (See abstract, Fig. 1, and [0067]). Claim 16 is the method embodiment of claim 1 and is rejected with the same reasoning. Claim 17 is the method embodiment of claim 1 and is rejected with the same reasoning. Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Conner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Berlips et al. (US Pub No. 2020/0237032). Regarding claim 3, Park does not teach a brightness of the light emitted by the light-emitting device is based on the comparison information. Berlips teaches brightness of the light emitted by the LED is based on different conditions (See [0061]). One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have been motivated to modify Park’s device to include Berlips’ teachings in order to better emphasize more urgent alarms. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. Regarding claim 4, Park teaches a color of the light emitted by the light-emitting device is based on the comparison information (See [0045]). Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Conner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Paidimarri et al. (US Pub No. 2020/0265285). Regarding claim 9, Park teaches an indicator ambient electromagnetic power harvesting (AEPH) device (See abstract), comprising: an antenna (See abstract); an AEPH circuit coupled to the antenna and configured to receive radio frequency (RF) signals (See abstract, [0038], and Fig. 1, 110- antenna); a controller configured to receive electrical power from the AEPH circuit and an RF signal from the antenna (See abstract, [0038], and Fig. 1, 130- controller); a physical indicator configured to be controlled by the controller (See abstract, [0026], [0037], and Fig. 1, 190- LED); and an indicator control data (ICD) memory coupled to the controller (See abstract, Fig. 1, and [0037]-[0038]), wherein the controller is configured to: receive information from an RF signal received via the antenna, the information comprising interrogation data (See [0012] and [0063]); compare data stored in the ICD memory with the interrogation data to generate comparison information (See [0012] and [0063]); and cause the physical indicator to emit a physical signal, based on the comparison information (See [0012] and [0063]). Park does not teach a substrate, a configuration to receive radio frequency (RF) energy collected by the antenna and to convert the RF energy into electrical power or a second antenna; a second AEPH circuit coupled to the second antenna and configured to receive second RF energy collected by the second antenna and convert the second RF energy into second electrical power. Conner teaches a substrate and configured to receive radio frequency (RF) energy collected by the antenna and to convert the RF energy into electrical power (See [0003]-[0004], Fig. 1, and abstract). One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have been motivated to modify Park’s devices to include Conner’s teachings for a lower cost RFID tag. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. Paidimarri teaches a second antenna on an RFID that is configured to receive second RF energy collected by the second antenna and convert the second RF energy into second electrical power (See abstract, Fig. 3-5, and [0040]-[0041]). One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have been motivated to modify Perk’s device to include Paidimarri’s teachings in order to “leverage the diversity to enhance a system operation” (Paidimarri, [0018]). Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. Regarding claim 10, Park does not teach the first RF energy is received in a first RF frequency range; and the second RF energy is received in a second RF frequency range. Paidimarri teaches multiple antennas to handle multiple frequencies, a different frequency range for each of the multiple antennas (See [0005]). Regarding claim 11, Park does not teach the second RF energy has a higher RF power level than the first RF energy. Paidimarri teaches the second RF energy has a higher RF power level than the first RF energy (See [0061]). Claims 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Conner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim (US Pub No. 2022/0129721). Regarding claim 12, Park does not teach the physical indicator comprises an audio transducer and the physical signal comprises a sound emitted by the audio transducer. Kim teaches the physical indicator comprises an audio transducer and the physical signal comprises a sound emitted by the audio transducer (See [0012] and [0052]). One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have been motivated to modify Park’s device to include Kim’s teachings in order to better emphasize more urgent alarms. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. Regarding claim 15, Park teaches the physical indicator is a light-emitting device and the physical signal comprises light emitted by the light-emitting device (See abstract, Fig. 1, and [0067]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS S MCCORMACK whose telephone number is (571)272-0841. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM. 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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached at (571) 272-3059. 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. /THOMAS S MCCORMACK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 10, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 13, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602676
IMAGE-BASED USER POSE DETECTION FOR USER ACTION PREDICTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598202
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRIORITIZING LIMITED RESOURCES FOR SECURITY MANAGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596189
METHOD FOR TRANSFERRING INFORMATION VIA A MOBILE BEACON
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588672
REPELLENCE SYSTEM AND REPELLENCE METHOD FOR REPELLING ANIMALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584938
MOTION-ACTIVATED SOUND PLAYER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
80%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+3.4%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 683 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