Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/682,565

FIELD DEVICE TRANSMITTER HOUSING

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 09, 2024
Examiner
TRANDAI, CINDY HUYEN
Art Unit
2648
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Endress+Hauser
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
394 granted / 508 resolved
+15.6% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
533
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.1%
-35.9% vs TC avg
§103
72.1%
+32.1% vs TC avg
§102
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
§112
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 508 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 . Allowable Subject Matter Claim 26 is 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of made of record does not teach or fairly suggest the combination of claimed elements “wherein the second rigid and flat section has a projection delimited by the recess, wherein the projection at its first end has a leading edge facing the first rigid and flat section, and the leading edge terminates the projection and has a base at its second end opposite the first end on which the projection adjoins a remaining region of the second rigid and flat section without a projection, wherein the base abuts the connection between the second rigid and flat section and the at least one flexible and bent section, and wherein the leading edge lies outside a contour of the at least one flexible and bent section and faces the aperture so that the projection is accessible from the aperture” as recited in claim 26. Claims 27-30 and 32-33 are depending on claim 26. Therefore, claims 27-30 and 32-33 are allowed for the same reason as claim 26. Claim 31 is 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of made of record does not teach or fairly suggest the combination of claimed elements “wherein the transmitter housing is at least partially electrically conductive and has an electrically-conductive web extending into the housing interior, wherein a connecting element comprising an electrically-conductive fastening means is arranged on the first rigid and flat section for fastening the printed circuit board to the web, and wherein, at the connecting element, a grounding cable can be connected to the transmitter housing such that the grounding cable is electrically conductively connected to the web via the fastening means when attached to the web for shielding the transmitter housing” as recited in claim 31. 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 – 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. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Brockhaus et al. (US 20190014391 A1). Regarding claim 17, Brockhaus teaches a transmitter housing an automation field device (Fig. 1 and Par. 79), wherein the transmitter housing is a single-chamber housing having an aperture (Fig. 3), wherein the field device includes a printed circuit board arranged in the transmitter housing (Pars. 40, 81), wherein the printed circuit board has a first rigid and flat section (Fig. 7 and Par. 81, second rigid part as a terminal unit 13), a second rigid and flat section ((Fig. 7 and Par. 81, first rigid part), and at least one flexible and bent section (Par. 81, rigid-flex circuit board ), wherein the two rigid and flat sections are connected to one another only via the at least one flexible and bent section (Fig. 7 and Par. 81), wherein the first rigid and flat section is accessible from the aperture (Par. 87) and forms a connecting region which has at least one connecting element for connecting at least one cable (Pars. 43, 85, ground (cable)) and wherein the first rigid and flat section and the second rigid and flat section are arranged relative to each other at a first angle between 60° and 120° (Par. 40). 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. Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brockhaus et al. (US 20190014391 A1) in view of Loeffel et al. (US 20150028730 A1). Regarding claim 18, Brockhaus teaches previous claim. Brockhaus further teaches the transmitter housing according to claim 17, further including a removable cover via which the aperture can be closed (Par. 87, a cap). It is well-know that the cap is for closing and opening as evidence by Loeffel (Fig. 2 and Par. 30-31). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught Loeffel into Brockhau for sealing electronics in the housing. Regarding claim 19, the modified Brockhaus teaches previous claim. The modified Brockhaus further teaches the transmitter housing according to claim 18, wherein the single-chamber housing has exactly one aperture (Loeffel, Fig. 2). Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brockhaus et al. (US 20190014391 A1) in view of Loeken et al. (US 20220333959 A1). Regarding claim 20, Brockhaus teaches previous claim. However, Brockhaus does not teach the transmitter housing according to claim 17, wherein a plane of the aperture is parallel to a plane of the first rigid and flat section. Loeken teaches such feature (Fig. 1 and Pars. 34, 38). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught Loeken into Brockhau to effectively detect sensor signal. Claims 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brockhaus et al. (US 20190014391 A1) in view of Schmich (US 6396709 B1). Regarding claim 21, Brockhaus teaches previous claim. However, Brockhaus does not teach the transmitter housing according to claim 17, wherein the at least one flexible and bent section of the printed circuit board includes at least two flexible and bent sections. Schmich teaches such feature (Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught Loeken into Brockhau to deform in a shape as desired. Regarding claim 22, the modified Brockhaus teaches previous claim. The modified Brockhaus further teaches the transmitter housing according to claim 21, wherein the at least two flexible and bent sections, in a transverse direction perpendicular to a connection direction along which the first rigid and flat section, the at least two flexible and bent sections, and the second rigid and flat section are connected to one another, have a width smaller than a width of the first rigid and flat section and/or a width of the second rigid and flat section (Schmich Col. 2 Lines 55-56). Regarding claim 23, the modified Brockhaus teaches previous claim. The modified Brockhaus further teaches the transmitter housing according to claim 22, wherein the printed circuit board has exactly two flexible and bent sections that each connect two outer edge regions of the two rigid and flat sections to one another (Schmich Fig. 1). Regarding claim 24, Brockhaus teaches previous claim. However, Brockhaus does not teach the transmitter housing according to claim 17, wherein the printed circuit board has a recess extending between the at least one flexible and bent section and the second rigid and flat section. Schmich teaches such feature (Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught Loeken into Brockhau to reduce the stiffness. Regarding claim 25, the modified Brockhaus teaches previous claim. The modified Brockhaus further teaches the transmitter housing according to claim 21, wherein the printed circuit board has a recess between regions not connected to each other of the first rigid and flat section and the second rigid and flat section (Schmich Fig. 1). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Korhummel et al. US 11642041 B1 (2) FIG. 1 shows a cross-section through a first exemplary embodiment of the printed-circuit board 1 according to the present invention. Printed-circuit board 1 has a first rigid section 2 and a second rigid section 3 which are interconnected by an elastically deformable middle section 4. Moyer et al. US 20200405132 A1 Melzi US 20200327974 A1 Jansson US 20180172416 A1 Hayes et al. US 20090066587 A1 Kubon et al. US 20190067891 A1 The second rigid portion 6 is electrically connected here to a first rigid portion 5 by a flexible central portion 4 of the printed circuit board 11 (also see FIG. 3) (3 lines of Par. 61) Blier et al. US 20150092363 A1 [0039] The PCB 42 has a first PCB portion 44 on which the CFP2 female connector 28 is mounted and a second PCB portion 46 on which the CFP male connector 30 is mounted. A flexible PCB portion 48 electrically interconnects PCB portion 44 and PCB portion 46. A PCB manufactured with the technology enabling it to have integral rigid and flexible portions is referred to in the PCB industry as a "rigid-flex PCB". Arnold US 20080047135 A1 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CINDY HUYEN TRANDAI whose telephone number is (571)270-1914. The examiner can normally be reached 8am -4:30pm. 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 L. 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. /Cindy Trandai/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648 1/15/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 09, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12581554
COMMUNICATION METHOD FOR NEAR-FIELD COMMUNICATION DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581604
SIGNAL PROCESSING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568534
OBJECT TRACKING SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12555244
PERFORMING SEMANTIC SEGMENTATION OF 3D DATA USING DEEP LEARNING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12556896
CACHING A DATA PAYLOAD ON A PERIPHERAL DEVICE FOR DELIVERY TO A TARGET DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
78%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+18.3%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 508 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