Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/699,301

POSITION SENSORS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 08, 2024
Examiner
ZAKARIA, AKM
Art Unit
2858
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Sc2N
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
653 granted / 794 resolved
+14.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
841
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§103
52.7%
+12.7% vs TC avg
§102
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
§112
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 794 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(s) (IDS) submitted on 04/08/2024 have been considered by the Examiner. Claim Objections Claim(s) 1, 5 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites a term “an element”. Examiner suggests amending the term to recite “a retention element” to restore antecedent clarity for the term in dependent claims. Claim 5 recites a phrase “in claim 1 4,”. Examiner suggests amending the phrase to recite “in claim 1,” to restore clarity. Claim 9 recites a phrase “a sensor assembly as claimed in claim 1”. Examiner suggests amending the phrase to recite “the inductive-technology position sensor of claim 1” to restore antecedent clarity. Appropriate correction is required. 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 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. Claim(s) 1-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ELDRED et al. (WO 2015049176; hereinafter ELDRED). Regarding claim 1, ELDRED discloses in figure(s) 1-7 An inductive-technology position sensor for an electric machine, wherein the position sensor is formed by a casing (20,22; fig. 2a,2b) and a sensitive element (pcb assembly 24 with position encoder; pg. 14 line 26-27 - position measurement device) disposed in the casing, the casing comprising a cover (22) and a connector (39) from which at least one connection cable (32) extends, wherein the position sensor comprises an element (21) for retaining the connection cable (pg. 14 line 19-25 – perimetral flange 21 with the open U-shaped channel 23 means cable 32 with its connector 39 can easily be installed). Regarding claim 2, ELDRED discloses in figure(s) 1-7 the position sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein the retention element (21) is disposed on the cover (22) on the outside of the sensor (24). Regarding claim 3, ELDRED discloses in figure(s) 1-7 the position sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein the retention element (21) is formed by a non-closed channel (23) in which the cable (32) or cable harness is disposed. Regarding claim 4, ELDRED discloses in figure(s) 1-7 the position sensor as claimed in claim 3, wherein the channel (23) is rectilinear or in the shape of a wave. Regarding claim 5, ELDRED discloses in figure(s) 1-7 the position sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein the retention element (21) is formed by at least one clip (25; pg. 13 lines 1-5 - ribbed regions 19 help the deformed point 25 of the flange 21 to engage with the lid 22, thereby helping to secure the lid 22 to the body 20 and in particular to help prevent the lid 22 from sliding around on the ledge 17). Regarding claim 6, ELDRED discloses in figure(s) 1-7 the position sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein the retention element is formed by a non-closed channel (23) and at least one clip (25). Regarding claim 7, ELDRED discloses in figure(s) 1-7 the position sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein the retention element is formed from the cover (pg. 10 line 15-20 - perimetral ledge 17 extending around the bottom of the perimetral flange 21 provides a seat for the lid 22). Regarding claim 9, ELDRED discloses in figure(s) 1-7 An electric machine (pg. 15 - coordinate positioning apparatus such as coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) and machine tools) comprising a sensor assembly as claimed in claim 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. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ELDRED in view of LUNDIN et al. (WO 2008115131). Regarding claim 8, ELDRED teaches in figure(s) 1-7 the position sensor as claimed in claim 1, ELDRED does not teach explicitly wherein the retention element is overmolded from the cover. However, LUNDIN teaches in figure(s) 1-7 wherein the retention element is overmolded from the cover (housing 20 with a flange 24 cable 40 guided by a peripheral recess or a groove 28 in the flange 24; fig. 2). 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 teachings of ELDRED by having wherein the retention element is overmolded from the cover as taught by LUNDIN in order to provide combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results as evidenced by "housing also comprises a lateral exit for said line which opens into said recess. Thus, the flexible line can be wound around the housing while being held snugly within the recess or groove, making it possible to direct the cable in any desired direction while avoiding that the cable bends or forms a loop." (abstract). Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ELDRED in view of Hannewald et al. (US 20050155780). Regarding claim 10, ELDRED teaches in figure(s) 1-7 an inductive-technology position sensor claimed in claim 1. ELDRED does not teach explicitly a gearbox. However, Hannewald teaches in figure(s) 1-3 a gearbox (para. 35 - drive pinion drives the throttle flap shaft 4 rotatably via a gearbox; fig. 1) comprising an inductive-technology position sensor claimed in claim 1. 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 teachings of ELDRED by having a gearbox as taught by Hannewald in order to provide a use case as evidenced by "sensor can be a position sensor registering the position of the throttle flap shaft or of the gearbox" (para. 26). Prior Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the List of References cited in the US PT0-892. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKM ZAKARIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0664. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-5 PM (PST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Judy Nguyen can be reached on (571) 272-2258. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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. /AKM ZAKARIA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 08, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601807
PROCESS AND SYSTEM FOR CHARACTERIZING A FIXTURE COMPONENT OF A TEST FIXTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596138
ELECTRICAL SENSOR AND METHOD OF MOLDING AN INSULATOR AROUND AN ELECTRICAL SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596159
MULTI-WIRE BONDING TEST CIRCUIT FOR A CONVERTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590820
CAPACITANCE DETECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12578370
QUENCH DETECTION IN SUPERCONDUCTORS
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
82%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+16.3%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 794 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