Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/652,963

VOLTAGE CONTROL CIRCUITS AND METHODS FOR OPERATING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
May 02, 2024
Examiner
RADKE, JAY W
Art Unit
2827
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allowance Rate
722 granted / 842 resolved
+17.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
863
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
66.1%
+26.1% vs TC avg
§102
10.6%
-29.4% vs TC avg
§112
17.4%
-22.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 842 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 June 4, 2026 has been entered. Claim Objections Claims 1 and 3-10 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 1: since “each” is a singular noun then the verb form will have to be singular for correct grammar in English. For example, see the correct grammar used in claim 9. Claims 3-10 depend on claim 1. Accordingly, Examiner suggests amending the claim as follows: Claim 1: A circuit, comprising: an amplifier having a first input terminal and a second input terminal; a first current source having a control terminal connected to an output terminal of the amplifier and configured to provide a first current; a plurality of second current sources, wherein each of the plurality of second current sources (i) has a control terminal connected to the output terminal of the amplifier, (ii) has a second terminal connected to a first terminal of a respective switch of a plurality of switches, and (iii) provides a respective second current, wherein: each second terminal of the plurality of second current sources is selectively connected to a respective second terminal of the respective switch of the plurality of switches, and each of the plurality of switches is configured to be activated to conduct the respective second current provided by a corresponding one of the plurality of second current sources, causing the circuit to provide a plurality of adjustable voltages; and a current mirror permanently connected to a second terminal of each of the plurality of switches. 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 11-18 and 21 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. Regarding claim 11: The limitation “the respective second currents” lacks sufficient antecedent basis. The limitation “the corresponding second current” lacks sufficient antecedent basis. Claims 12-18 depend on claim 11. Examiner suggests amending the claim as follows: Claim 11: A circuit, comprising: an amplifier configured to provide an error voltage determined based on a difference between a reference voltage and a divided voltage; a first current source including a first transistor, wherein the first transistor is gated by the error voltage and configured to provide a first current; a plurality of second current sources each including a second transistor, wherein the second transistors of the plurality of second current sources are also gated by the error voltage and are configured to provide second currents; a plurality of switches, wherein each of the plurality of switches has a respective first second terminal selectively connected to a corresponding one of the plurality of second current sources; and a current mirror permanently connected to a respective second terminal of each of the plurality of switches, wherein at least one of the plurality of switches is configured to be activated to conduct a corresponding current, among the second currents, provided by a corresponding one of the plurality of second current sources for the current mirror to mirror. Regarding claim 21: The noun “second terminal” requires an article such as “a” particularly when the noun phrase is intended to provide antecedent basis for a subsequent reference to it later in the claim, which will use the definite article “the”. Hence, no use of an article for both instances makes the claim indefinite. Accordingly, Examiner suggests amending the claim as follows: Claim 21: The method of claim 19, wherein the total charging current is mirrored by a current mirror connected to one or more second terminals of the one or more switches, and wherein the one or more second current sources are selectively coupled to terminals of the one or more second terminals of the one or more switches. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because the new grounds 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. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 19-20 allowed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY W RADKE whose telephone number is (571)270-1622. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6 EST. 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, Amir Zarabian can be reached at 272-1852. 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. JAY W. RADKE Primary Examiner Art Unit 2827 /JAY W. RADKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2827
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 02, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Dec 10, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 25, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112
May 22, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 04, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 10, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12676187
FERROELECTRIC FIELD EFFECT TRANSISTORS BASED APPROACH FOR EUCLIDEAN DISTANCE CALCULATION IN NEUROMORPHIC HARDWARE
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12676201
MEMORY SYSTEM
1y 11m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12670939
MEMORY SYSTEM, OPERATING METHOD OF THE MEMORY SYSTEM, AND INTERFACE CIRCUIT OF THE MEMORY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12670951
SILICON BRAIN
1y 8m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12665019
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
3y 8m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+8.6%)
2y 0m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 842 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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