Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/570,757

SENSOR, SENSOR SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTING THERMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS OF A SAMPLE, AND USE OF THE SENSOR OR SENSOR SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 15, 2023
Examiner
JAGAN, MIRELLYS
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Linseis Messgeräte GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
1215 granted / 1467 resolved
+14.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
1492
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
47.0%
+7.0% vs TC avg
§102
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§112
13.1%
-26.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1467 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the features described in claims 21-40 must be shown or the feature s canceled from the claim s (the drawings do not belong to the disclosure of this application) . No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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. For examination purposes, the drawings are considered to be the drawings shown in the Certified Foreign Priority Document dated 11/19/21 filed on 12/15/23. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character s not mentioned in the description: “T0”, “T”, and “d”, as shown in figure s 2a and 2b . Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) 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. Specification The specification is objected to because of the following informalities: The specification does not include reference characters “T0”, “T”, and “d” that are shown in figures 2a and 2b. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claims 21- 32 and 35-38 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 21, --at least one-- should be added before “self-supporting” in lines 8, 12-13, 17, and 18 and before “thermopile” in line 15; --and-- should be added after “membrane,” in line 13; “of a calibration carried out by the at least one heating element and a sample arranged at or on the self-supporting membrane” should be changed to -- on the basis of a sample arranged at or on the self-supporting membrane and a calibration carried out by the at least one heating element-- in lines 15-17 (as presently written, it appears to state that the sample also carries out the calibration); and --by the sample-- should be added after “absorption of heat” in the last line (it is not clear if the sample is what releases or absorbs the heat). In claim 22, --at least one-- should be added before “electronic” in line 2 and before “self-supporting” in lines 4 and 6; --to-- should be added after “opposite” in lines 3 and 6; and “and” should be deleted from line 6. In claim 23, “the region in which the particular sample is arranged” should be changed to --a region of the at least one self-supporting membrane at or on which the sample is arranged-- in line 2 (there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the region” and “the particular sample,” and it is not clear if the region is a region at or on the membrane). In claim 24, --of the at least one self-supporting membrane-- should be added after “layer” in line 3 (it is not clear if the layer is a layer of the at least one self-supporting membrane); “integrated,” should be changed to --integrated; and-- in line 4; “the surface” should be changed to --a surface-- in line 5; “being” should be changed to --is-- in lines 7 and 8; and --at least one-- should be added before “self-supporting” in line 8. In claim 25, “the outer edge” should be changed to --an outer edge-- in lines 1 and 3, and “the electrical conductors” should be changed to --electrical conductors-- in line 2 (there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the outer edge” and “the electrical conductors”); and --at least one-- should be added before “self-supporting” in lines 2-4. In claim 26, “the outer edge” should be changed to --an outer edge-- in lines 5-6 ; and --at least one-- should be added before “substrate” in the last line. In claim 27, “the outer ends” should be changed to --outer ends-- in line 3 (there is lack antecedent basis in the claim for “the outer ends”); --at least one-- should be added before “substrate” in lines 4 and 7; and “further” should be deleted from line 5 (there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for the at least one thermopile having electrical contact elements, as stated by the “or” in “and/or” in line 4 and implied by the term “further” in line 5). In claim 28, --,-- should be added after “element” in line 2; and --of-- should be added after “outside” in line 7. In claim 29, --at least one-- should be added before “self-supporting ” in line s 1-2, 2-3, and 4; and “the second surface” should be changed to --a second surface-- in lines 3-4 (there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the second surface”). In claim 30, --at least one-- should be added before “substrate” in line 1 and before “self-supporting” in line 2. In claim 31, --of the at least one self-supporting membrane-- should be added after “region” in line 1; and “the electrical current” should be changed to --an electrical current-- in line 5 and “the metabolism” should be changed to --a metabolism-- in lines 7-8 (there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the electrical current” and “the metabolism” ) . In claim 32, “the proportion” should be changed to --a proportion-- and “the atmosphere” should be changed to --an atmosphere-- in respective lines 2 and 3 (there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the proportion” and “the atmosphere”). In claim 35, “the” should be changed to --a-- in line 1; “the electrical voltage” should be changed to --an electrical voltage-- and “the ends” should be changed to --ends-- in line 4 (there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the electrical voltage” and “the ends”; --at least one-- should be added before “self-supporting” in line 8; and --by the sample-- should be added after “absorption of heat” in the last line (it is not clear if the sample is what releases or absorbs the heat). In claim 36, --at least one-- should be added before “self-supporting” in line 2. In claim 37, “the temperature of the substrate” should be changed to --a temperature of the at least one substrate-- in lines 1-2. In claim 38, “the region” should be changed to --a region-- in line 3, “the drop” should be changed to --a drop-- in line 4, and “the temperature drop curve” should be changed to --a temperature drop curve-- in line 6 (there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the region,” “the drop,” and “the temperature drop curve”). Appropriate correction is required. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 22, 28, 29, 31-34, 36, and 38-40 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. In claim 22, the alternative ‘and’ in “and/or” in line 4 makes the claim unclear because it appears to state that the sample (a single sample) is arranged at or on two separate second surfaces of the at least one self-supporting membrane. In claim 28, the alternative ‘and’ in “and/or” in line 4 makes the claim unclear because it is not clear if the “thermally conductive supporting or retaining structures” recited in line 5 are referring to the thermally conductive supporting or retaining structures recited in lines 3-4 . In claim 29, there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the housing” throughout the last line. In claim 31, it is not clear how or if the measured variable that is characteristic of a metabolism of the sample, as recited in lines 7-8, is related to the electrical current flow measured by the at least one electronic evaluation and control unit recited in lines 6-7 (it is not clear if the measured variable that is characteristic of a metabolism of the sample is obtained or based on the measured electrical current flow). In claim 32, there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the housing” in lines 2 and 3. In claim 33, there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the at least two sensors” in line 1. In claim 34, there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the thermopiles of the two sensors” in lines 1-2. In claim 36, there is lack of antecedent basis in the claim for “the housing” in lines 1-2. In claim 38, it is not clear if the limitations of the claim are in addition to the steps recited in base claim 35 or if they are describing a step recited in base claim 35; it is not clear what member of the sensor (of base claim 21) is used to increase the temperature gradient as recited in lines 1-2; it is not clear what member of the sensor (of base claim 21) is providing the “at least one pulse” recited in line 2; and it is not clear what member of the sensor (of base claim 21) is detecting the “drop in the temperature in the region of the sample” recited in lines 4-5 and the “temperature drop curve” recited in line 6. In claim 40, it is not clear how the claimed step relates to the steps recited in base claim 35; it is not clear if the “ biological cells ” are referring to the sample recited in base claim 35; and it is not clear what member of the sensor recited in base claim 21 are performing the claimed step. Claims 39 is rejected for being dependent on a rejected base claim. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 21-40 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection s under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, and the objections set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not disclose or suggest the following in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims: A sensor for detecting thermodynamic parameters of a sample, comprising at least one electronic evaluation and control unit, which is electrically connected to the thermopile and is configured for detecting, on the basis of a calibration carried out by the at least one heating element and a sample arranged at or on the self-supporting membrane, at least one temperature gradient that has formed in the self-supporting membrane owing to a thermodynamic process taking place in the sample and an associated release of heat or absorption of heat (claims 21, 35). Conclusion The references made of record and not relied upon by the examiner (U.S. Patent 6,079,873 being the closest art) are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure by disclosing the detection of thermodynamic parameters of a sample, but do not disclose the allowable subject matter stated above. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MIRELLYS JAGAN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-2247 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Tuesday-Friday 8-6 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Kristina DeHerrera can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 303-297-4237 . 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. FILLIN "Examiner Stamp" \* MERGEFORMAT /MIRELLYS JAGAN/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 2855 3/ 30 /26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 15, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596036
TEMPERATURE PROBE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596086
SENSOR ASSEMBLY FOR A DIFFERENTIAL SCANNING CALORIMETER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590842
PHOTONIC THERMOMETER MODULE ASSEMBLY AND PERFORMING PHOTONIC THERMOMETRY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590847
TEMPERATURE SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584798
PROTECTIVE TUBE, TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT ARRANGEMENTS AND METHODS FOR TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS IN A PROCESS VESSEL
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
83%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+5.6%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1467 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