Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/498,601

SYSTEMS FOR AND METHODS FOR OUT-OF-BAND FILTERS

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Oct 31, 2023
Examiner
PUENTES, DANIEL CALRISSIAN
Art Unit
2849
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
807 granted / 911 resolved
+20.6% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
940
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
39.7%
-0.3% vs TC avg
§102
33.6%
-6.4% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 911 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-16 and 21-24 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. As discussed in the 8/12/2025 Non-Final Rejection, claim 1 does not explicitly require an amplifier. However, since further detail of the amplifier is claimed by the amendment to claim 1, it is unclear what is considered to be the intended use of the recited first inductor, second inductor and notch filter (i.e., requiring the mere capability to perform) and what the claimed device must comprise (e.g., an amplifier and/or signal processors). For the purposes of examination, Examiner will interpret that the device of claim 1 includes an amplifier that is capable of use with signal processors. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1-2, 8-10 and 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 2021/0409047) in view of Khlat et al (US 2016/0352368). For claim 1, Chen teaches a device (Figures 1, 8A and 16) comprising: a first inductor (L2); a second inductor (L1) magnetically coupled with the first inductor (K12) and electrically coupled with an amplifier (within 803, [0172]-[0173]); and a notch filter (C3 and Ls) electrically coupled between the first inductor and the second inductor (as understood by examination of Figure 8A); and wherein the amplifier is configured to amplify a plurality of radio frequency signals of a plurality of protocols received from an antenna (simultaneous operation of 4G and 5G signals, [0072] and [0108]), the amplifier configured to provide at least temporally overlapping spectral content ([0005]) for the plurality of protocols to signal processors (transceiver, baseband system) to identify symbols of the plurality of protocols embedded in the radio frequency signals (as understood by examination of Figure 16); wherein a bandwidth of the plurality of radio frequency signals exceeds 1.5 gigahertz ([0075]-[0076]). Chen fails to teach: a plurality of radio frequency signals … conveyed to the amplifier via the first inductor and the second inductor Chen teaches that the tunable notch filter of Figure 8A is implemented in an RF front end of a mobile device (813 of Figure 16, [0172]), However, Khlat teaches an RF front end (Figure 2) having a reception path which sequentially includes an antenna (32), switch (34), a notch filter (40) and an amplifier (42). Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement Chen’s RF front end circuitry such that it includes an amplifier receiving the output of Chen’s notch filter since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. For claim 2, the combination of Chen and Khlat as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches: the second inductor is directly coupled to a gate terminal of the amplifier (as understood by the combination of references as cited above). For claim 8, Chen teaches a system (Figures 1, 8A and 16) comprising: a first inductor (L2), having a first terminal (right) and a second terminal (left); a second inductor (L1) having a first terminal (right) electrically coupled with the second terminal of the first inductor at a first node (node directly connected between L1, L2 and C3), the second inductor magnetically coupled with the first inductor (K12); a filter coupled with the first node (C3, Ls); and an amplifier (158, Figure 15B) electrically coupled with a second terminal of the second inductor (left terminal, as understood by examination of Figures 8A and 15B), the amplifier to amplify a plurality of at least temporally overlapping ([0005]) and non-spectrally overlapping signals (signals over multiple operating bands, [0003] and illustrated in Figure 1), each signal of the plurality of signals corresponding with at least one center frequency (dependent upon selected frequency band, 159 of Figure 15B) and provide the plurality of amplified signals to signal processors (transceiver, baseband system) to identify symbols embedded in the received signals (as understood by examination of Figure 16). Chen fails to teach: the amplifier to amplify … signals received via the first inductor and the second inductor from an antenna. Chen teaches that the tunable notch filter of Figure 8A is implemented in an RF front end of a mobile device (813 of Figure 16, [0172]), However, Khlat teaches an RF front end (Figure 2) having a reception path which sequentially includes an antenna (32), switch (34), a notch filter (40) and an amplifier (42). Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement Chen’s RF front end circuitry such that it includes an amplifier receiving the output of Chen’s notch filter since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. For claim 9, the combination of Chen and Khlat as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 8 and Chen further teaches: the plurality of signals comprise signals corresponding to center frequencies in a 5 GHz band and signals corresponding to center frequencies in a 6 GHz band ([0003], [0075]). For claim 10, the combination of Chen and Khlat as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 8 and Chen further teaches: a first center frequency corresponding with a first signal of the plurality of signals exceeds five gigahertz ([0003], [0075]); and a second center frequency corresponding with a second signal of the plurality of signals exceeds the first center frequency by more than one GHz ([0003], [0075]). For claim 21, the combination of Chen and Khlat as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 1 and Chen further teaches: the first inductor is coupled with an antenna on an opposite end as the second inductor (as understood by the combination of references). For claim 22, the combination of Chen and Khlat as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 21 and Chen further teaches: the radio frequency signals comprise Bluetooth and Wi-Fi data received from the antenna ([0170]). For claim 23, the combination of Chen and Khlat as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 8 and Chen further teaches: the first inductor is coupled with an antenna on an opposite end as the second inductor (as understood by the combination of references). For claim 24, the combination of Chen and Khlat as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 8 and Chen further teaches the plurality of signals comprise Bluetooth and Wi-Fi data received from the antenna ([0170]). Claim(s) 3-7 and 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, Klat and Cheng et al (US 2016/0308506). For claim 3, the combination of Chen and Khlat as cited above teaches the limitations of claim 1 but fails to teach a multi-tap inductor as claimed. However, Cheng teaches a multi-tap inductor (Figures 3 and 5), wherein: a first tap pair of the multi-tap inductor (2, 3) corresponds to a first terminal of the first inductor and a second terminal of the first inductor (L2s’); and a second tap pair of the multi-tap inductor (1, 2) corresponds to a third terminal of the second inductor and a fourth terminal of the second inductor (L1s’). Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement Chen’s first inductor and second inductor using a multi-tap spiral inductor for the advantages taught in [0031] of Cheng. Furthermore, the particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. For claim 4, the combination of Chen and Khlat in view of Chang as defined above teaches the limitations of claim 3 and further teaches: the first terminal couples with the third terminal (as understood by the combination of references); a terminal of the notch filter couples with the first terminal and the third terminal (as understood by the combination of references); and another terminal of the notch filter couples with a reference voltage (bottom terminal of Ls). For claim 5, Chen and Khlat in view of Chang as defined above teaches the limitations of claim 4 and further teaches a capacitor (C3) having: a first terminal which couples with the first terminal and the third terminal (as understood by examination of Chen’s Figure 8A); and a second terminal which electrically couples with a third inductor (Ls), wherein the third inductor couples with a third tap pair of the multi-tap inductor (e.g., Cheng’s nodes 1 and 3, Figure 5). For claim 6, Chen and Khlat in view of Chang as defined above teaches the limitations of claim 3 and further teaches: the multi-tap inductor is a multi-tap spiral inductor (Cheng, Figure 3). For claim 7, Chen and Khlat in view of Chang as defined above teaches the limitations of claim 6 and further teaches: the device is formed along a planar surface of a semiconductor die (as understood by examination of Cheng’s [0031] and Figure 4). For claim 11, the combination of Chen and Khlat teaches the limitations of claim 1 but fails to teach a multi-tap inductor as claimed. However, Cheng teaches a multi-tap inductor (Figures 3 and 5), wherein: a first tap (3) of the multi-tap inductor corresponds to the first terminal of the first inductor (L2s’); a second tap of the multi-tap inductor corresponds to the second terminal of the first inductor (2); a third tap of the multi-tap inductor (2) corresponds to the first terminal of the second inductor (L1s’); and a fourth tap of the multi-tap inductor corresponds to the second terminal of the second inductor (1). Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement all of Chen’s inductors in Figure 8A using a multi-tap spiral inductor for the advantages taught in [0031] of Cheng. Furthermore, the particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. For claim 12, Chen and Khlat in view of Chang as defined above teaches the limitations of claim 11 and further teaches: the second tap is coupled with the third tap (as understood by the combination of references); and a filter separates the second tap and the third tap from a reference voltage (C3 and Ls, Chen). For claim 13, Chen and Khlat in view of Chang as defined above teaches the limitations of claim 12 and further teaches: the filter is a notch filter comprising a first capacitor (C3) and a third inductor (Ls), the third inductor comprising a first terminal (top) and a second terminal (bottom); and the reference voltage is a ground voltage (as understood by examination of Figure 8A). For claim 14, Chen and Khlat in view of Chang as defined above teaches the limitations of claim 13 and further teaches: the multi-tap inductor comprises a fifth tap corresponding to the first terminal of the third inductor (node between -M and Lp1 of Cheng’s Figure 5, corresponding to the top terminal of C3 of Chen), and a sixth tap corresponding to the second terminal of the third inductor (as understood by Figure 8A of Chen). For claim 15, Chen and Khlat in view of Chang as defined above teaches the limitations of claim 13 and further teaches: the multi-tap inductor is a multi-tap spiral inductor (Figure 3, Cheng). For claim 16, Chen and Khlat in view of Chang as defined above teaches the limitations of claim 13 and further teaches: the first inductor, the second inductor, and a third inductor are formed along a planar surface of a semiconductor die (as understood by examination of Cheng’s [0031] and Figure 4). Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL CALRISSIAN PUENTES whose telephone number is (571)270-5070. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6:30 (flex). 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, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached at 571-270-3684. 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. /DANIEL C PUENTES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2849
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 31, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 04, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 04, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 07, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 13, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Apr 06, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 13, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 13, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592687
PHASE INTERPOLATOR (PI) INCLUDING WEIGHTED SUMMING CIRCUIT AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592694
INTEGRATED CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587009
OVERSHOOT CURRENT DETECTION AND CORRECTION CIRCUIT FOR ELECTRICAL FAST TRANSIENT EVENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580556
MULTI-GAIN STAGE CIRCUIT AND ASSOCIATED CALIBRATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12580557
METHOD, APPARATUS FOR OPERATING A CONDUCTION ASSEMBLY, START DEVICE, AND COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+2.9%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 911 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