Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/622,199

CONTROL CIRCUIT OF A TRIAC OR A THYRISTOR

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 29, 2024
Examiner
ISLAM, MUHAMMAD S
Art Unit
2846
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
STMicroelectronics
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
523 granted / 595 resolved
+19.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
608
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
§103
33.0%
-7.0% vs TC avg
§102
34.3%
-5.7% vs TC avg
§112
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 595 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION This action is responsive to the following communications: the Application filed on March 29,2024. Claims 1-15 are presented for Examination. Claim 1 is independent. 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 Objections Claim 14 recites “a three-phase voltage comprising the circuit of 1” objected to because of the following informalities: it should be a three-phase voltage comprising the circuit of claim 1. 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 applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-15 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. In claim 1 recites the limitations of “a first reference node” and “a second reference node” renders the claim vague and indefinite. Because the disclosure fails to clearly and exactly pointed what they are. For the examination purpose these will be treated as a power supply high side and low side (ground) . Also claim 1 recites "comprising at least the semiconductor device which is connected between..." is convoluted. It is unclear if the "comprising" refers to the "voltage rectifier assembly" or the "one of a semiconductor device.". In claim 2, 3,7 and 12 recite the limitations of "the first bipolar transistor". But there is no "first bipolar transistor" introduced previously. So, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Also "wherein when the at least one... is..., and the first bipolar transistor is..." is grammatically awkward. It implies two conditions rather than a narrowing of the element. Also claim 12 recites the limitations "a third diode." Claim 12 depends on Claim 1.Claim 1 does not recite a "first diode" or a "second diode." Therefore, "third" has no reference point. Even if the rectifier assembly implies diodes, they are not distinctly claimed as "first" and "second." So, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitations in the claim of 12. Again claim 12 recites "Collector": References the "collector of the first transistor." As noted in Claim 2, Claim 1 only allows for a generic "transistor" (which could be a MOSFET with a drain). This limits the claim to a BJT without explicitly amending the "transistor" to a "bipolar transistor.". Appropriate correction is requested. Since the independent claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and hence the dependents claim of 1 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). 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 1-4, 8, 10,11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thompson (A.C. Voltage Regulators, wireless Word, July 1973, pages 339-344)). Regarding independent claim 1, Thompson discloses that a circuit (Fig.7) comprising: a voltage rectifier assembly (Fig.7:D1-D4); at least a triac or a thyristor (Fig.7:1,2) having its driving reference terminal connected to a first reference node (Fig.7: 4) and coupled in series with one of a semiconductor device of the voltage rectifier assembly comprising at least the semiconductor device which is connected between the first reference node and a second reference node (Fig.7:8) of the control circuit; at least one control circuit of the triac or thyristor comprising: a first transistor (Fig.7:Tr3); and a driving circuit of the first transistor referenced to the second reference node(8). Regarding claim 2, Thompson discloses that wherein when the at least one control circuit is a triac control circuit, and the first bipolar transistor is a bipolar transistor of a NPN type(Fig.7:Tr3 and Triac). Regarding claim 3, Thompson discloses that wherein when the at least one control circuit is a thyristor control circuit, and the first bipolar transistor is a bipolar transistor of a PNP type (Fig.7:Tr2). Regarding claim 4, Thompson discloses that wherein the semiconductor device is a first diode whose anode is connected to the second reference input node(Fig.7:D6). Regarding claim 8, Thompson discloses that wherein the at least one control circuit is a control circuit of at least two triacs or one thyristor and at least one triac (Fig.7). Regarding claim 10, Thompson discloses that wherein the assembly comprises a first input node and a second reference input node, between which an AC voltage is applied (Fig.7 and Title). Regarding claim 11, Thompson discloses that further comprising a power factor correction circuit (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 of this title, 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 5, 7, 9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson (A.C. Voltage Regulators, wireless Word, July 1973)) in view of BENABDELAZIZ et al (US 20190214985). Regarding claim 5, Thompson fails to teach but BENABDELAZIZ et al. that wherein the semiconductor device is a MOS type transistor (Fig.3:38,34). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the triac control system, using the teaching of BENABDELAZIZ et al’s Thyristor gate control circuit, in order to obtain a inrush current limitations by resistor (e.g. see BENABDELAZIZ et al. para.[0053]). Regarding claim 7, Thompson fails to teach but BENABDELAZIZ et al. that when the at least one control circuit is a triac control circuit, the driving circuit comprises a Zener-type diode (Fig.3: DZ) coupling a base of the first bipolar transistor to a first conduction terminal of the first bipolar transistor (Fig.3:31). Regarding claim 9, Thompson fails to teach but BENABDELAZIZ et al. that wherein the at least one control circuit is configured to be controlled by a processor (Fig.1:MCU). Regarding claim 12, Thompson fails to teach but BENABDELAZIZ et al. that wherein a third diode (Fig.1) is coupled in series between a gate of the triac or the thyristor and a collector of the first transistor of the at least one control circuit of the triac or thyristor. Claims 6,13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson (A.C. Voltage Regulators, wireless Word, July 1973)) in view of Suzuki et al (US 20230308008). Regarding claim 6, Thompson fails to teach but Suzuki et al. that wherein the semiconductor device is an assembly comprising an IGBT type transistor connected in antiparallel with a diode or a second reverse-conducting IGBT type transistor (Fig.2:QL). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the triac control system, using the teaching of Suzuki et al’s motor control circuit, in order to obtain Self-generating power supply for the fate driver and motor (e.g. see Suzuki et al. para.[0023]). Regarding claim 13, Thompson fails to teach but Suzuki et al. that wherein the AC voltage is a three phases AC voltage (Fig.2:U,V,W). Regarding claim 14, Thompson fails to teach but Suzuki et al. that a supply circuit of a motor (Fig.2:14) supplying a three-phase voltage comprising the circuit of 1. Regarding claim 15, Thompson fails to teach but Suzuki et al. that further comprising a processor (Fig.3:GDH) configured to drive the at least one control circuit. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD S ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8439. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:30am to 6:00pm. 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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached on 571-272-2060. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MUHAMMAD S ISLAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 29, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597646
ENERGY DEVICE CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595700
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ADJUSTING THE OPENING SPEED AND TORQUE OF A DOOR WITH A DOOR OPERATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592627
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR POWER SWITCH CONTROL FOR INVERTER FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592656
SENSORLESS MOTOR CIRCUIT PROVIDING ACCURATE BACK ELECTROMOTIVE FORCE ZERO-CROSSING POINT DETECTION AND OPERATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587122
ELECTRIC DRIVE SYSTEM WITH ELECTRIC MACHINE HAVING STATIONARY ROTOR POWER TRANSFER
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
88%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+7.7%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 595 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