Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/743,314

PULSE COUNTER

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 14, 2024
Examiner
BHATIA, AMIT R
Art Unit
2842
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Dolphin Design
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
16 granted / 21 resolved
+8.2% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
36
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
43.5%
+3.5% vs TC avg
§102
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
§112
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 21 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 14, 2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: AFE, IAF, NRST, etc.. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claims 2-5, 7-11, and 13-15 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 2-5 (Preamble) - missing "The pulse" at the beginning of the claim. Claims 7-8 (Preamble) - missing "The" at the beginning of the claim. Claims 9-11 (Preamble) - replace "A circuit" with "The circuit" in the preamble of the claim. Claims 13-15 (Preamble) - missing "The" at the beginning of the claim.. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. 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 9-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 9 (line 2) recites "an acoustic characteristic extraction function". There is a lack of written description of this function. Thus, the specification fails to provide a demonstration of possession of such a function. Claim 10 (line 2) recites "to integrate a signal". There is a lack of written description as to the integration of the signal. Thus, the specification fails to provide a demonstration of possession of such a unit. Claims 2-5 and 10-11 are 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. Claims 2-5 (Preamble) recites "Counter according to claim". It is unclear which 'counter' the applicant is referring to, 'pulse counter' or 'asynchronous counter'. For compact prosecution purposes, the examiner interprets the 'counter' of claims 2-5 to be 'the pulse counter' of claim 1. Thus, this is indefinite under 112(b). Claim 10 (lines 2-3) recites "a signal supplied by the first circuit". It is unclear which signal the applicant is referring to (a clock signal, a first synchronization signal, or a second synchronization signal) or is this a new signal being introduced in this claim. For compact prosecution purposes, the examiner interprets the 'signal' of claim 10 is the same as the 'clock signal' of claim 1. Thus, this is indefinite under 112(b). Claim 11 (line 3) recites "a signal supplied by said pulse counter". It is unclear which signal the applicant is referring to (a clock signal, a first synchronization signal, or a second synchronization signal) or is this a new signal being introduced in this claim. For compact prosecution purposes, the examiner interprets the 'signal' of claim 10 is the same as the 'clock signal' of claim 1. Thus, this is indefinite under 112(b). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 Applicant is reminded that claim mapping is provided as a courtesy to the applicant, but applicant should consider a reference as a whole, as the entire reference gives context to mapped sections. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-6 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by YANG MINHAO ET AL: "Design of an Always-On Deep Neural Network-Based 1-micro-W Voice Activity Detector Aided With a Customized Software Model for Analog Feature Extraction", IEEE JOURNAL OF SOLID-STATE CIRCUITS, IEEE, USA, vol. 54, no. 6, 1 June 2019 (2019-06-01), pages 1764-1777, XP011726809, ISSN: 0018-9200, DOI: 10.1109/JSSC. 2019.2894360; hereinafter Yang. Regarding Claim 1, Yang discloses a pulse counter (Section III.E. and Fig. 16: the "binarized MLP" comprises counters - "Ripple counters") comprising an asynchronous counter (Section III.E.: "Nine-bit counter," "interface between the asynchronous feature extraction front-end and the synchronous inference computing") and a circuit configured to trigger a read operation of the value of said asynchronous counter (Section III.E.: "the control signals for the counters[...] are generated by the controller block"; Fig. 16: the "controller block" produces selection signals "sel0_cnt" and "sel1_cnt" to read the values of the "Nine-bit counters"), said circuit being synchronized by a clock signal (Fig. 16: the "controller block" is controlled by a clock signal "clk"). Regarding Claim 2, Yang discloses the counter according to claim 1, further comprising a flip-flop (Fig. 16: the presence of "reg" registers suggests the use of flip-flops) adapted to receive said value from said asynchronous counter during a reading phase (the registers serving to temporarily store the values of the "Nine-bit counters"). Regarding Claim 3, 4, and 5, Yang discloses the counter according to claim 1, in which a reading phase is triggered by an edge of a first synchronization signal, a reading phase is stopped by an edge of a second synchronization signal, and wherein said edge of the second synchronization signal further triggers the resetting of said value of said asynchronous counter (Fig. 16: the reading of counter values when signals "sel0_cnt" and "sel1_cnt" are received, and the resetting when a signal "rst_cnt" is received, are implicitly performed on the edges of the clock signal "clk"). Regarding Claim 6, Yang discloses a circuit (Section II and Fig. 3) suitable for recognizing words from an audio file comprising a pulse counter (see claim 1 rejection above) according to claim 1. Regarding Claim 9, Yang discloses the circuit according to claim 6, further comprising a first circuit (Abstract, Fig. 3; analog signal processing) adapted to implement an acoustic characteristic extraction function (AFE). Regarding Claim 10, Yang discloses the circuit according to claim 6, further comprising a second circuit (Section II; Fig. 3; integrate-and-fire/IAF) adapted to integrate a signal supplied by the first circuit. Regarding Claim 11, Yang discloses the circuit according to claim 6, further comprising a third circuit (Abstract, Sections II & III.E., Fig. 3 & 16; digital binarized MLP comprising a digital deep neural network/DNN) configured to implement digital processing of the signal supplied by said pulse counter (clk). Regarding Claim 12, Yang discloses a device (Abstract) adapted to process an audio file comprising a circuit (see claim 6 rejection above) according to claim 6. Regarding Claim 13, Yang discloses the device according to claim 12, further comprising a microphone (Abstract). Regarding Claim 14, Yang discloses the device according to claim 12, further comprising a neural network (Abstract; digital deep neural network/DNN). Regarding Claim 15, Yang discloses the device according to claims 12, adapted to detect the human voice (Abstract; voice activity detector/VAD). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 Applicant is reminded that claim mapping is provided as a courtesy to the applicant, but applicant should consider a reference as a whole, as the entire reference gives context to mapped sections. 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 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang. Regarding Claims 7 and 8, Yang discloses the claimed invention according to claim 6 except for having a clock frequency between 30 and 40 kHz; in which the clock frequency is equal to 32.728 kHz. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to specify the value of the clock frequency since the Applicant has not disclosed that a specific clock frequency solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with any clock frequency provided. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Amit Bhatia whose telephone number is (571)272-4410. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:30pm 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, Regis Betsch can be reached at (571) 270-7101. 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. /Amit R Bhatia/Examiner, Art Unit 2842 /REGIS J BETSCH/SPE, Art Unit 2843
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 14, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597924
DETERIORATION INHIBITING CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591281
RESET OUTPUT WITH OPEN DRAIN CONFIGURATION FOR FUNCTIONAL SAFETY (FUSA) APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592696
CASCODE SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587101
POWER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WITH DISTRIBUTED ERROR FEEDBACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12567858
High-Speed Delay Line for Die-To-Die Interconnect
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
76%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+29.4%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 21 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