Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/427,105

APPARATUS FOR FORCE SENSING AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jan 30, 2024
Examiner
MCCALL, ERIC SCOTT
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Goertek Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
812 granted / 925 resolved
+19.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
949
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
42.0%
+2.0% vs TC avg
§102
19.5%
-20.5% vs TC avg
§112
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 925 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
APPARATUS FOR FORCE SENSING AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE FIRST OFFICE ACTION This action takes into account the Applicant’s Preliminary Amendment of Jan. 30, 2024. DRAWINGS The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the element number “23” which is set forth in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the element numbers in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office Action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the Examiner, the Applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office Action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. TITLE The title is objected to because it is not clearly descriptive of the claimed invention. The phrase “and Electronic Device” is indefinite as to the meaning thereof. A suggested title is “Apparatus for Force Sensing in an Electronic Device”. ABSTRACT The abstract has been considered and approved. SPECIFICATION The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. The Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which the Applicant may become aware of in the specification. CLAIMS In the event that the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the rationale supporting the rejection would be the same. Objections Claims 4 and 5 are both objected to because uncertainty exists as to whether the number “4” in the phrase “according to claim 34” (line 1) has been struck through. With such a short deletion, brackets [ ] should be used instead of strike-throughs. Claim 4 has been interpreted as depending from claim 3. Claim 20, line 2; the phrase “an apparatus” should be changed to --the apparatus--. 35 U.S.C. § 112 In accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(b), 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. Claims 2 - 13, 16 - 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for not specifically pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter regarded as the invention. Claim 2 is indefinite as to how the magnitude of a sum of the first change and the second change can be smaller than the magnitude of just the first change. Claim 7 is indefinite because the subject matter thereof has already been set forth in parent claim 3. Claim 11 is indefinite because the subject matter thereof has already been set forth in parent claim 3. Claim 17 is indefinite as to how the magnitude of a sum of the third change and the fourth change can be smaller than the magnitude of just the third change. Claim 18 is indefinite as to the meaning of the claim and the meaning of the limitation “a first is positive and three are negative; or a first is negative and three are positive”. Claim 20 is indefinite because the claim calls for an apparatus according to claim 1 and the deformable portion. The apparatus of claim 1 already has a deformable portion. Thus, the phrase “the deformable portion” references the apparatus (of claim 1). Uncertainty exists as to the reason for the phrase “the deformable portion”. Allowable Subject Matter Independent claim 1 has been found to be allowable over the prior art because the prior art fails to teach or suggest an apparatus for sensing force, comprising the combination of: a first property which has a dependency on deformation of the deformable portion, a second property which has a dependency on temperature at the deformable portion, the first property has another dependency on the temperature at the deformable portion in absence of a second hardware element; wherein when the temperature at the deformable portion changes within a target range, a first change is induced into the first signal through the dependency of the first property on the temperature, and a second change is induced into the first signal through the dependency of the second property on the temperature, and wherein the second change compensates for the first change. Claims 2 - 20 depend from claim 1 and would be allowable for, at least, that reason pending the claims are rewritten to overcome any above rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112. CITED DOCUMENTS The Applicant’s attention is directed to the “PTO-892” form for the relevant art made of record at the time of this Office Action. CONTACT INFORMATION Any inquiry concerning this communication from the Examiner should be directed to Eric S. McCall whose telephone number is 571-272-2183. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. For questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, the Applicant is advised to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at: https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. /Eric S. McCall/Primary Examiner Art Unit 2855
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 30, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601452
PIPELINE INTEGRITY MONITORING SYSTEM (PIMS) FOR OIL, GAS AND OTHER PIPELINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590986
ACCELERATION-MEASURING SENSOR ASSEMBLY COMPRISING AN ACCELEROMETER SUBASSEMBLY WITH THREE MEASUREMENT AXES, AND A SEISMIC MASS MOVING IN A STRAIGHT LINE ALONG A PRINCIPAL AXIS A, WHICH ASSEMBLY IS MOUNTED IN A HOUSING AND CONFIGURED TO DETERMINE AN ACCELERATION ALONG A MEASUREMENT AXIS Y
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584939
ACCELEROMETER HAVING A DIFFERENTIAL CAPACITANCE BETWEEN DETECTING PLATES AND DETECTING ELECTRODES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12566107
INSTRUMENTATION COMB FOR AN AIRCRAFT ENGINE WITH SENSORS AND INTEGRATED ELECTRONIC SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12559190
VEHICLE PERIPHERY DETECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
88%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+6.0%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 925 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