Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/458,044

RADAR-AIDED WARNING SYSTEM FOR PACEMAKER WEARERS AGAINST POTENTIAL ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE BY MOBILE DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Aug 29, 2023
Examiner
DIETRICH, JOSEPH M
Art Unit
3796
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
743 granted / 918 resolved
+10.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
959
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
45.8%
+5.8% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
12.3%
-27.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 918 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1 – 4, 10 – 14, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stancer et al. (US PGPUB 2012/0277815). Regarding claims 1 and 11, Stancer discloses an electronic device and a method, comprising: a radio frequency (RF) transceiver (e.g. ¶ 24 and 28); and a processor configured to: obtain sensor data from a sensor of the electronic device (e.g. ¶ 35 and 45); detect electromagnetic interference (EMI) risk based on the sensor data obtained (e.g. ¶ 35 – 37); determine whether a condition for executing an EMI risk mitigation function is satisfied, based on the detected EMI risk (e.g. ¶ 35 – 37); and in response to determining that the condition for executing the EMI risk mitigation function is satisfied, performing the EMI risk mitigation function (e.g. ¶ 35 – 37; switch to the EMI operating mode). Regarding claims 2 and 12, Stancer discloses at least one of: adjusting a radio frequency (RF) transmit power; and outputting an alert that warns a user of the electronic device about a pacemaker in relation to the detected EMI risk (e.g. ¶ 52). Regarding claims 3 and 13, Stancer discloses in response to determining that the condition for executing the EMI risk mitigation function is not satisfied, operating the electronic device without executing the EMI risk mitigation function (e.g. ¶ 51). Regarding claims 4 and 14, Stancer discloses detecting the EMI risk further comprises estimating a distance to a heart of a user of the electronic device; and determining whether the condition for executing an EMI risk mitigation function is satisfied further comprises determining whether the distance to the heart satisfies a proximity condition. Regarding claims 10 and 20, Stancer discloses detecting the EMI risk based on identifying a setting in which pacemaker compatibility is activated (e.g. ¶ 35 – 37). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5 – 9 and 15 – 19 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. Regarding claims 5, 6, 15, and 16, the prior art fails to teach obtaining radar data into a sliding input data window that includes recent radar frames from the radar data… filtering the data window to pass through a subset of the radar data that matches a typical frequency range of a heartbeat…. And detecting the heartbeat is present based on a determination that an energy of the subset of the radar data satisfies a threshold energy condition, along with the other limitations of independent claims 1 and 11. Regarding claims 7, 8, 17, and 18, the prior art fails to teach obtaining inertial measurement unit data corresponding to a sliding input data window… classifying the IMU data as one from among a set of EMI risk classes… determining that the condition for executing the EMI risk mitigation function is satisfied or not satisfied based on wehre the IMU data is classified, along with the other limitations of independent claims 1 and 11. Regarding claims 9 and 19, the prior art fails to teach when the primary sensor includes both radar and IMU, operate the electronic device without executing the EMI risk mitigation function, and when the primary sensor does not include both the radar and the IMU, obtain second sensor data from a secondary sensor, the secondary sensor being different from the primary sensor and being the IMU when the primary sensor is the radar, and the secondary sensor being the radar when the primary sensor is the IMU, along with the other limitations of the claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH M DIETRICH whose telephone number is (571)270-1895. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00. 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, Jennifer McDonald can be reached at 571-270-3061. 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. /JOSEPH M DIETRICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 29, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 31, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588822
Remote Physiological Monitor
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589254
WEARABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATOR WITH AI-BASED FEATURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589245
SYSTEMS AND METHODS RELATED TO THE TREATMENT OF BACK PAIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585108
IMAGE GENERATING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575623
Features for Support Garment for a Wearable Medical Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
81%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+7.5%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 918 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month