Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/642,351

CAPACITIVE SMART ROAD FOR VEHICLE LOCALIZATION

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 22, 2024
Examiner
NGUYEN, HOAI AN D
Art Unit
2858
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Torc Robotics, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
612 granted / 711 resolved
+18.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
733
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.9%
-37.1% vs TC avg
§103
35.6%
-4.4% vs TC avg
§102
37.8%
-2.2% vs TC avg
§112
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 711 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on April 22, 2024 is being considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings were received on May 6, 2024. These drawings are acceptable. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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 and 3-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nathan et al. (EP 3457263 A1). Nathan et al. teaches a combined capacitance and pressure sensing apparatus comprising: PNG media_image1.png 720 514 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 684 426 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 652 488 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 722 490 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 686 434 media_image5.png Greyscale With regard to claims 1, 9 and 17, a system (FIG. 28, apparatus 104) comprising: a plurality of first wires (FIG. 28, first electrodes 8); a plurality of second wires (FIG. 28, second electrodes 9), each of the plurality of second wires (FIG. 28, second electrodes 9) overlapping over one or more wires of the plurality of first wires (FIG. 28, first electrodes 8) at a respective overlapping area of each of the one or more wires of the plurality of first wires (FIG. 28, first electrodes 8); a dielectric material (FIG. 27 in view of FIG. 28, piezoelectric material 10) disposed in a vertical gap at each respective overlapping area forming a capacitance sensor (FIG. 28, first touch sensor 2) of a plurality of capacitance sensors (FIG. 28, first touch sensors 2), the capacitance sensor (FIG. 28, first touch sensor 2) including a first electrode (FIG. 28, first electrode 8) and a second electrode (FIG. 28, second electrode 9), the first electrode (FIG. 28, first electrode 8) corresponds with a wire of the plurality of first wires (FIG. 28, first electrodes 8) and the second electrode (FIG. 28, second electrode 9) corresponds with a wire of the plurality of second wires (FIG. 28, second electrodes 9); at least one voltage source (FIG. 28 in view of FIG. 1, signal source 44) having a positive bias connected to the first electrode (FIG. 28, first electrode 8) of the capacitance sensor (FIG. 28, first touch sensor 2) and a negative bias (FIG. 10 in view of FIG. 1 and FIG. 28, voltage bias source 52) connected to the second electrode (FIG. 28, second electrode 9) of the capacitance sensor (FIG. 28, first touch sensor 2) (Abstract; paragraphs: [0003], [0010]-[0013], [0029]-[0035], [0048], [0057], [0061], [0092], [0101], [0113]-[0121], [0135]-[0142], [0146]-[0147] and [0221]-[0232]; and claims 1-15). With regard to claims 3, 9 and 17, a grid (FIG. 28, touch panel 103) of a plurality of capacitance sensors (FIG. 28, first touch sensors 2), each wire of the plurality of first wires (FIG. 28, first electrodes 8) having a first width and each wire of the plurality of the second wires (FIG. 28, second electrodes 9) having a second width (FIG. 28; and paragraphs: [0003] and [0201]). With regard to claims 1, 9 and 18, at least one processor (FIG. 28 in view of FIG. 3, processor 32 and controller 79) configured to: periodically measure change in respective electric field of each capacitance sensor (FIG. 28, first touch sensor 2) of a subset of capacitance sensors (FIG. 28, first touch sensors 2) of the plurality of capacitance sensors (FIG. 28, first touch sensors 2); and store data (FIG. 28 in view of FIG. 3, storage 31 and removable storage 36) corresponding to periodically measured change in the respective electric field of each capacitance sensor (FIG. 28, first touch sensor 2) of the subset of capacitance sensors (FIG. 28, first touch sensors 2) (Abstract; paragraphs: [0003], [0010]-[0013], [0029]-[0035], [0048], [0057], [0061], [0092], [0101], [0113]-[0121], [0135]-[0142], [0146]-[0147] and [0221]-[0232]; and claims 1-15). With regard to claims 4 and 12, the vertical gap at each respective overlapping area filled with the dielectric material (FIG. 2, dielectric layer 27) has a height of a predetermined value (FIG. 2, thickness of dielectric layer 27 in the direction z) (Paragraph: [0099]). With regard to claims 5 and 13, the dielectric material (FIG. 2, dielectric layer 27) includes one of plastics, ceramic, or paper (Paragraph: [0100]). With regard to claims 6 and 14, the plurality of first wires (FIG. 27, first electrodes 8) and the plurality of second wires (FIG. 28, second electrodes 9) are laid out as separated by a predetermined horizontal distance (FIGS. 27 and 28). With regard to claims 7 and 15, the subset of capacitance sensors (FIG. 28, first touch sensors 2) of the plurality of capacitance sensors (FIG. 28, first touch sensors 2) is selected corresponding to a size of an object causing change in the respective electric field of each capacitance sensor of the subset of capacitance sensors (FIG. 28, first touch sensors 2) (Paragraphs: [0003], [0009] and [0105]). With regard to claims 8 and 16, subset of capacitance sensors (FIG. 28, first touch sensors 2) of the plurality of capacitance sensors (FIG. 28, first touch sensors 2) is selected (Paragraphs: [0003], [0009] and [0105]) based on a dimension of a vehicle (intended use and/or desirable choice) (emphasis added). With regard to claims 11 and 20, the first width is same as the second width (FIG. 28; and paragraphs: [0003] and [0201]) (intended use and/or desirable choice). With regard to claim 19, the plurality of first wires (FIG. 27, first electrodes 8) and the plurality of second wires (FIG. 28, second electrodes 9) are laid out to run orthogonally while overlapping (FIG. 28). 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. Claim 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathan et al. Nathan et al. teaches all that is claimed as discussed in the above rejection of claims 1 and 3-20 including the plurality of first wires (FIG. 28, first electrodes 8) and the plurality of second wires (FIG. 28, second electrodes 9), each of the plurality of second wires (FIG. 28, second electrodes 9) overlapping over one or more wires of the plurality of first wires (FIG. 28, first electrodes 8) at a respective overlapping area, wherein the plurality of first wires (FIG. 27, first electrodes 8) and the plurality of second wires (FIG. 28, second electrodes 9) are laid out to run orthogonally while overlapping (FIG. 28), but it does not explicitly disclose the following feature: The plurality of first wires and the plurality of second wires are laid out to run diagonally in opposite directions while overlapping. It is noted that the feature as recited in claim 2 upon which applicants rely (i.e., “the plurality of first wires and the plurality of second wires are laid out to run diagonally in opposite directions while overlapping”) is just a mere rearrangement of parts and not sufficient by itself to patentably distinguish over Nathan et al. In fact, “The mere fact that a worker in the art could rearrange the parts of the reference device to meet the terms of the claims on appeal is not by itself sufficient to support a finding of obviousness. The prior art must provide a motivation or reason for the worker in the art, without the benefit of appellant’s specification, to make the necessary changes in the reference device.” Ex parte Chicago Rawhide Mfg. Co., 223 USPQ 351, 353 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter.1984). Therefore, the court held that mere rearrangement of parts has no patentable significance since it would both not have modified the operation of the device and an obvious matter of design choice (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ7 (CCPA 1975): please see MPEP 2144.04 VI. C. Rearrangement of Parts for more details). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined capacitance and pressure sensing apparatus of Nathan et al. to lay out the plurality of first wires and the plurality of second wires to run diagonally in opposite directions while overlapping since such an arrangement is beneficial to provide desirable and exemplary choices for a touch panel of the combined capacitance and pressure sensing apparatus. Such an implementation can significantly increase the effectiveness of physical compactness with desirable levels of accuracy, resolution, stability and reliability in the measurements. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicants’ attention is invited to the followings whose inventions disclose similar devices. Lee et al. (US 8,680,877 B2) teaches a touch sensing apparatus. Wang et al. (US 9,817,501 B2) teaches a touch display panel. Bairo (US 2013/0175591 A1) teaches a capacitive device. Min et al. (WO 2023/279234 A1) teaches a touch-control panel and a touch-control display apparatus. CONTACT INFORMATION Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOAI-AN D. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-2170. The examiner can normally be reached MON-THURS (7:00 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, LEE E. RODAK can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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. HOAI-AN D. NGUYEN Primary Examiner Art Unit 2858 /HOAI-AN D. NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 22, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 24, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 30, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 01, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601769
INPUT ISOLATED VOLTAGE MONITOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601776
Power-Semiconductor-Device Test Apparatus Facilitating Test-Connection Changes
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597926
VEHICLE STEERING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591021
SHORT-CIRCUIT DETERMINATION CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576711
STEERING DEVICE
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+10.6%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 711 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