Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/663,962

Accurate Frequency Oscillators

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 14, 2024
Examiner
KINKEAD, ARNOLD M
Art Unit
2849
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Psemi Corporation
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allow Rate
1250 granted / 1373 resolved
+23.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1394
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
40.8%
+0.8% vs TC avg
§102
33.3%
-6.7% vs TC avg
§112
17.4%
-22.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1373 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 08-14-25, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1,2,7-9, 15 and 17 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive(re claims 15 and 17). A new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of new cite to Matsue and Ho(of record). Claim Objections Claim 13 objected to because of the following informalities: Please delete the “(d)” notation for the last para in the claim. Appropriate correction is required. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1, 3, 7-9, 15, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho(US 6,809,603, of record) in view of Matsue(US 7,180,794)new cite. Re claim 1, 3 and 15 and 17: The main reference, Ho ‘603, shows an oscillator(30, ring type), with a voltage supply variation reduction circuit (including Bias circuit 32) configured to be coupled to a voltage source(Vdd in module 32) and to pass a first current (I0 )as a function of the voltage source(Vdd) exceeding a selected value (Vdiode(50)); PNG media_image1.png 773 1628 media_image1.png Greyscale a bias generation circuit(32), coupled to the voltage supply variation reduction circuit and configured to be coupled to the voltage source(Vdd), the bias generation circuit configured to pass a second current (I1)when the voltage of the voltage source exceeds the selected value(V Vdiode), wherein the second current is essentially constant at stable temps; a temperature-compensation circuit including( 44b )and (resistance 54), configured to be coupled to the voltage source(Vdd), the temperature-compensation circuit configured to pass a temperature-compensated third current(I2) through the at least one FET(46); and oscillator circuitry(ring osc) coupled to the temperature-compensation circuit and configured to pass the temperature-compensated current and generate an output comprising a periodic waveform (F0). The main reference, Ho, does not show the NMOSFET (46)and a negative temperature coefficient resistor while the NFET has a positive temp coefficient with capacitive loading. Threshold temp characteristic(s) is not described. Lastly, gating (claim 16)a ring oscillator, that is, using a NAND type gate with enable signal is not shown. The reference to Matsue shows use of negative resistances with the MOSFET inverters(PMOS,NMOS)and conventionally these MOSFET's on-resistance have a positive temperature coefficient; meaning, it increases with temperature; the reference to Matsue, see conventional figures 8 and 9, below, showing the n-stage ring osc(>=5 stages), for example, where the resistors R11,Rnn are negative temp coefficient types, with the NMOSFET in series. Figure 9 showing capacitors coupled to the output node and reference potential(GND) for each stage. The examiner takes official notice with regards the conventional MOSFET's on-resistance has a positive temperature coefficient, increasing with temperature, generally, while at a threshold voltage, it has a negative temperature coefficient, decreasing as temperature rises(clm 3). PNG media_image2.png 1130 908 media_image2.png Greyscale The reference shows more than the five stages, however, for a certain number(5 stages) this is a simple matter of design consideration, depending on frequency where the negative temp resistors are placed on all stages to enhance the frequency stability(clm 17). PNG media_image3.png 1206 942 media_image3.png Greyscale Finally, gating a ring oscillator, that is, using a NAND type gate(claim 16) to allow for an enable signal to trigger the ring, is conventional and examiner will take official notice with regards this function(see cited reference below). In light of the above it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have recognized that temperature compensated ring oscillator shown by Ho may include several conventional enhancing features such as the negative temp coeff resistors and capacitive loading, shown by Matsue, as a simple matter of design consideration, and thus benefit from further temperature compensation. The particular number of RO stages being another simple matter of design consideration for frequency. Enabling the RO operation with use of a NAND gate is also conventional. Ultimately, the idea is to keep the oscillator clock frequency constant in view of the known temp and bias changes. Re claims 7, 8 and 9: the oscillator clock frequency remains constant in light of ambient temp variations that also affect the voltage source/biasing. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The reference to Chen shows the use of NAND gate with enable signal inputs for the ring oscillators, see abstract figure. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 13 and 14 are allowed. Claims 5, 6 and 10-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARNOLD M KINKEAD whose telephone number is (571)272-1763. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-5:30pm(Fri-Flex). 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, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached at 571-270-3684. 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. ARNOLD M. KINKEAD Primary Examiner Art Unit 2849 /ARNOLD M KINKEAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2849
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 14, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 23, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
May 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 14, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603651
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND METHOD THAT APPLIES STRESS TO TRANSISTORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597932
QUBIT CONTROL CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591797
GEOMETRICALLY ENHANCED CLIFFORD QUANTUM COMPUTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592666
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR REDUCING A FREQUENCY DRIFT IN A VOLTAGE CONTROLLED OSCILLATOR (VCO)
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587015
Dispatchable Decentralized Scalable Solar Generation Systems
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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
91%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+8.0%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1373 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