Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/618,637

ELECTRONIC DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 27, 2024
Examiner
TRAN, TUAN A
Art Unit
2648
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Vivo Mobile Communication Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
658 granted / 774 resolved
+23.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
792
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.1%
-35.9% vs TC avg
§103
42.9%
+2.9% vs TC avg
§102
30.4%
-9.6% vs TC avg
§112
7.3%
-32.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 774 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 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. Claims 1,3 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Howes (9,185,480). Regarding claim 1, Howes discloses an electronic device (See fig. 1 and Abstract), comprising: a housing (See fig. 1), wherein a sound intake hole 112 is provided on the housing, and the housing comprises an inner cavity; and a microphone 114 and a balance valve 126 are arranged inside the housing, wherein the microphone is in communication with the sound intake hole through a first sound guide channel (i.e. vertical sound path from the sound intake hole 112 to the microphone 114), the balance valve (See fig. 1 and col. 3 line 65 to col. 4 line 55) is in communication with the sound intake hole through a second sound guide channel (i.e. horizontal sound path from the sound intake hole 112 to the balance valve), and the balance valve is located at a junction of the inner cavity and the second sound guide channel; and the first sound guide channel is in communication with the second sound guide channel (See fig. 1 and col. 2 line 56 to col. 3 line 23). Regarding claim 3, Howes discloses as cited in claim 1. Howes further discloses a placement groove (i.e. inner case 116) in communication with the microphone inner hole is further provided on the housing, and the microphone 114 is placed in the placement groove (See fig. 1). Regarding claim 8, Howes discloses as cited in claim 1. Howes further discloses the first sound guide channel (i.e. vertical sound path from the sound intake hole 112 to the microphone 114) and the second sound guide channel (i.e. horizontal sound path from the sound intake hole 112 to the balance valve) form a fork shape, and an angle exists between a central axis of the first sound guide channel and a central axis of the second sound guide channel (See fig. 1). Regarding claim 9, Howes discloses as cited in claim 1. Howes further discloses the balance valve 126 is in communication with the second sound guide channel through a balance valve inner hole 128, and the balance valve is located on an end of the balance valve inner hole 128 that is close to the inside of the electronic device (See fig. 1). 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. Claims 4-5 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howes (9,185,480) in view of Tanaka (8,861,764). Regarding claims 4-5 and 6-7, Howes discloses as cited in claims 1 and 3. However, Howes does not explicitly mention that a shielding component is arranged along a whole side wall inside the placement groove (i.e. case) or first and second sealing components are arranged on side walls of the first and second sound guide channels respectively, wherein sealing components are an integrally formed member. Since Tanaka does suggest that a shielding component 43 is arranged along a whole inside side wall of the placement groove (i.e. case 121 for example) or first and second sealing components 43 are arranged on side walls of the first and second sound guide channels {22, 23 and 24 for example) respectively, wherein sealing components are an integrally formed member (i.e. a coating layer) (See fig. 14 and col. 19 line 17 to col. 20 line 9); therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to apply sealing components, as suggested by Tanaka, to the Howes’ device, for the advantage of preventing the entrance of the solder as well as enhancing the resistance to external electromagnetic fields (to prevent the entrance of external electromagnetic field noise) as suggested by Tanaka. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howes (9,185,480) in view of Abe (9,253,297). Regarding claim 2, Howes discloses as cited in claim 1. Howes further discloses the microphone is in communication with the first sound guide channel through a microphone inner hole (See fig. 1). However, Howes does not explicitly mention that a dustproof component is arranged inside the microphone inner hole. Since the use of dustproof component to cover a sound-collecting opening of microphone is well known in the art as suggested by Abe (See figs. 4-7 and col. 8 lines 38-45); therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to arrange dustproof component, as suggested by Abe, inside the microphone inner hole of the Howes’ device to cover it, for the advantage of preventing a foreign matter, such as dust and water, from entering into the sound transducer through the sound-collecting opening. Thereby, it is possible to ensure the microphone performance while reducing the noise generation and failure. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howes (9,185,480). Regarding claim 10, Howes discloses as cited in claim 1. However, Howes does not explicitly mention that a cross-sectional area of the balance valve is greater than or equal to 0.5 mm2 and less than or equal to 10 mm2. Since arranging/constructing a cross-sectional area of the balance valve is greater than or equal to 0.5 mm2 and less than or equal to 10 mm2 is merely a design choice depending on the size of an electronic device such as mobile phone; therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to arrange as such, for the advantage of providing a higher degree of freedom in constructing/arranging balance valve for the electronic device. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for a listing of cited prior arts of record. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUAN A TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7858. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM. 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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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. /TUAN A TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 27, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597991
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, WIRELESS COMMUNICATION APPARATUS, WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHOD AND PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593367
RE-ASSOCIATION INDICATION METHOD AND APPARATUS, AND COMMUNICATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592739
METHOD FOR DYNAMICALLY CONTROLLING RADIO FREQUENCY CIRCUIT, MODEM CHIP AND COMMUNICATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12562771
TRANSCEIVER AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION APPARATUS INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12560644
SYSTEM FOR TESTING USER EQUIPMENT
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
85%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+7.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 774 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