Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/531,617

SYNCHRONOUS RECTIFIER CIRCUIT POWERED BY A PORTION OF SECONDARY WINDINGS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 06, 2023
Examiner
GBLENDE, JEFFREY A
Art Unit
2838
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Navitas Semiconductor Limited
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
680 granted / 796 resolved
+17.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
812
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
52.2%
+12.2% vs TC avg
§102
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
§112
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 796 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This action is in response to the request for continued examination filed on 2/19/2026. 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/19/2026 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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 § 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-3, 5-11, 13-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khamesra et al. (US Patent 10554140) in view of Hua (US 2006/0018133) and Quaglino et al. (US Patent 10056844). Regarding claims 1 and 14, Khamesra et al. discloses (see fig. 1) a power conversion circuit comprising: a transformer (102) having a primary winding coupled to a secondary winding (primary and secondary windings of 102), wherein the primary winding is arranged to receive AC power from a power source (primary winding connection to AC input), that the secondary winding is arranged to transfer power to a load (secondary winding providing an output to a load), the secondary winding extending between a first terminal and a second terminal (two terminals of secondary winding), a synchronous switch (106) having a source terminal (source of 106), a gate terminal (gate of 106) and a drain terminal (drain of 106), the synchronous switch disposed between the secondary winding and the load (106 is connected between the secondary winding and the load), wherein the source terminal is directly connected to the first terminal (see connection of source to first output terminal); and a controller (112) arranged to operate the synchronous switch to rectify the power transferred to the load (output from 112 to gate of 106). Khamesra et al. does not disclose that the secondary winding including a tapped output disposed between the first and second terminals; and a controller arranged to receive power from the tapped output, the source terminal is directly connected to the first terminal, wherein the controller is directly connected to the first terminal. Hua discloses (see fig. 2) that a secondary winding includes a tapped output (see tapped output of secondary winding) disposed between first and second terminals (tapped output is between two terminals of the secondary winding); and a controller (58/62/64/66/52) arranged to receive power from the tapped output (58/62/64/66/52 connection to tapped output). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of Hua because it provides for a biasing control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Quaglino et al. discloses (see fig. 4) that a source terminal (source of transistor directly connected to secondary winding of Tr) is directly connected to a first terminal (source terminal of transistor directly connected to terminal that is connected to secondary winding of Tr), wherein a controller is directly connected to the first terminal (control and driving unit directly connected to terminal that is connected to secondary winding of Tr). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of Quaglino et al. because it provides for a regulation means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in an output, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claims 2, 10, and 17, Khamesra discloses the claimed invention except for the synchronous switch being formed from gallium nitride. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the synchronous switch be formed from gallium nitride, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of having the synchronous switch be formed from gallium nitride because it allows for a specific design choice, which can provide a reduction in component variance, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claims 3, 11, and 18, Khamesra discloses the claimed invention except for the controller being formed from silicon. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the controller be formed from silicon, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of having the controller be formed from silicon because it allows for a specific design choice, which can provide a reduction in component variance, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claims 5 and 13, Khamesra et al. does not disclose a diode positioned between the tapped output and the controller. Hua discloses (see fig. 2) a diode (56) positioned between the tapped output and the controller (56 between tapped output and 58/62/64/66/52). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of Hua because it provides for a biasing control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 6, Khamesra et al. does not disclose that the tapped output includes a fraction of a number of secondary winding turns. Hua discloses (see fig. 2) that that the tapped output (tap of secondary winding) includes a fraction of a number of secondary winding turns (see location of tapped output). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of Hua because it provides for a biasing control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claims 7 and 15, Khamesra et al. does not disclose that the secondary winding includes N turns between the first terminal and the second terminal and wherein the tapped output includes M turns between the first terminal and the tapped output, wherein M is less than N. Hua discloses (see fig. 2) that the secondary winding includes N turns between a first terminal and a second terminal (see turns of secondary winding between two terminals of secondary winding) and wherein the tapped output includes M turns between the first terminal and the tapped output (see windings between first terminal of secondary winding and the tapped output), where M is less than N (It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have M be less than N, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of Hua because it provides for a biasing control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 8, Khamesra et al. discloses (see fig. 1) a power conversion circuit comprising: a transformer (102) having a primary winding arranged to receive power from a power source (primary winding connected to AC input), a secondary winding arranged to transfer power to a load (secondary winding providing an output to a load) and a synchronous switch (106) having a source terminal (source of 106), a gate terminal (gate of 106) and a drain terminal (drain of 106), the synchronous switch disposed between the secondary winding and the load (106 is connected between the secondary winding and the load). Khamesra et al. does not disclose a tapped output arranged to transfer power to a controller circuit, wherein the secondary winding includes N turns between a first terminal and a second terminal and wherein the tapped output is formed from a portion of the secondary winding, the tapped output including M turns between the first terminal and the tapped output, where M is less than N and wherein the source terminal is directly connected to the first terminal, and wherein the controller is directly connected to the first terminal. Hua discloses (see fig. 2) a tapped output (tap of secondary winding) arranged to transfer power to a controller circuit (56/58/62/64/66/52 connection to tapped output), wherein the secondary winding includes N turns between a first terminal and a second terminal (see turns of secondary winding between two terminals of secondary winding) and wherein the tapped output is formed from a portion of the secondary winding (tapped output being between secondary winding), the tapped output including M turns between the first terminal and the tapped output (see windings between first terminal of secondary winding and the tapped output), where M is less than N (It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have M be less than N, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of Hua because it provides for a biasing control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Quaglino et al. discloses (see fig. 4) that a source terminal (source of transistor directly connected to secondary winding of Tr) is directly connected to a first terminal (source terminal of transistor directly connected to terminal that is connected to secondary winding of Tr), wherein a controller is directly connected to the first terminal (control and driving unit directly connected to terminal that is connected to secondary winding of Tr). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of Quaglino et al. because it provides for a regulation means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in an output, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 9, Khamesra et al. discloses (see fig. 1) that the controller circuit (112) is arranged to operate the synchronous switch to rectify the power transferred to the load (112 connection to gate of 106 for controlling the operation of 106). Regarding claim 16, Khamesra et al. does not disclose a diode positioned between the tapped output and the controller, the diode arranged to rectify power transferred to the controller. Hua discloses (see fig. 2) a diode (56) positioned between the tapped output and the controller (56 between tapped output and 58/62/64/66/52), the diode arranged to rectify power transferred to the controller (operation of 56).. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the method of Khamesra et al. to include the method of Hua because it provides for a biasing control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 20, Khamesra et al. does not disclose that the switch and the controller are co-packaged in a single electronic package. Quaglino et al. discloses (see fig. 10) that a switch and a controller are co-packaged in a single electronic package (see 1010). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of Quaglino et al. because it provides for a reduction in footprint and area required for circuit elements and thus allows for favorable integration of function and reduction of cost. Claim(s) 4, 12, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khamesra et al. (US Patent 10554140) in view of Hua (US 2006/0018133), Quaglino et al. (US Patent 10056844) and Vinciarelli (US Patent 11626808). Regarding claims 4, 12, and 19, Khamesra discloses the claimed invention except for the synchronous switch and the controller being formed from gallium nitride. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the synchronous switch and the controller be formed from gallium nitride, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of having the synchronous switch and the controller be formed from gallium nitride because it allows for a specific design choice, which can provide a reduction in component variance, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Khamesra et al. further doesn’t disclose that the synchronous switch and the controller are monolithically formed on a single die. Vinciarelli discloses (see fig. 7-8) that a synchronous switch and a controller are monolithically formed on a single die (see fig. 7-8 and column 20 lines 15-31). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the circuit of Khamesra et al. to include the features of Vinciarelli because it provides for a reduction in footprint and area required for circuit elements and thus allows for favorable integration of function and reduction of cost. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY A GBLENDE whose telephone number is (571)270-5472. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm. 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, Monica Lewis can be reached at 571-272-1838. 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. /JEFFREY A GBLENDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 06, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 20, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 13, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 19, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 26, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603571
Switched Capacitor Converter and Control Method
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603577
ASYMMETRIC HALF-BRIDGE FLYBACK POWER CONVERTER AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592649
Synchronous Rectification Controller And Switching Power Supply
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587098
SYNCHRONOUS COUPLED BOOST CIRCUIT, BOOST CIRCUIT AND POWER SUPPLY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587093
POWER APPARATUS WITH ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE REDUCTION FUNCTION
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+8.9%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 796 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