Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/855,035

CONTROL CIRCUIT FOR A MICROELECTROMECHANICAL SOUND GENERATOR, AND SOUND GENERATION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 08, 2024
Priority
May 30, 2022 — DE 10 2022 205 384.2 +2 more
Examiner
ELAHEE, MD S
Art Unit
2694
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Robert Bosch GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 6m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
668 granted / 845 resolved
+17.1% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
864
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
85.4%
+45.4% vs TC avg
§102
5.7%
-34.3% vs TC avg
§112
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 845 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
CTNF 18/855,035 CTNF 79796 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. DETAILED ACTION Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 14 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: regarding claims 14 and 15, the phrase “control circuit according to claim 9” in line 1 should apparently be “control circuit according to claim 10” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 AIA Claim s 17 and 18 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 17 recites the limitation “the microelectron mechanical sound generator” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Since claim 18 is dependent upon claim 17, this claim is also rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 10, 11 and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by D’Souza et al. (US Pub. No. 2015/0045095) . Regarding claim 10, with respect to Figures 1-8, D’Souza teaches an actuation circuit (see figure 1) [i.e., control circuit] for a (see paragraphs 0025-0026, piezo speakers 150A, 150B) including two external connections [i.e., outer terminals] and one central terminal (not restrictive on account of not being part of the claim), the control circuit comprising: a differential amplifier (amplifiers 145A, 145B) which includes two output connections (146+, 146-; 147+, 147-) [i.e., output terminals] electrically coupled to the two outer terminals of the sound generator and is configured to provide, between the two output terminals, an output voltage that corresponds to an input signal between two input connections (141+, 141-; 142+, 142) [i.e., input terminals] of the differential amplifier (fig.1; paragraphs 0025-0026); and a voltage generator circuit (see paragraphs 0071-0074 and figure 8, output common-mode control by amplifier 840, resistors 850, 860 and voltage 841 configured to provide (by way of output 842), at the central terminal of the sound generator, a predetermined DC voltage relative to a common mode voltage of the differential amplifier (fig.1, 8; paragraphs 0071-0074); wherein the control circuit is configured to set a supply voltage for the differential amplifier based on a maximum amplitude of the input signal (by way of DC reference 110) (fig.6; paragraphs 0033-0042). Regarding claim 11, D’Souza teaches that a level converter configured to adjust a signal level of the input signal and to provide the adjusted input signal at the input terminals of the differential amplifier (fig.1; paragraphs 0026, 0030) (Note; preamplifiers 140A, 140B in fig. amplify the respective input audio signals to generate respective (analog) amplified signals on differential paths 141+/141- and 142+/142- respectively.). Regarding claim 13, D’Souza wherein the control circuit is configured to provide, as the battery 105 [i.e., supply voltage] for the differential amplifier, an electrical voltage between a reference potential and a specified positive supply voltage (fig.1; paragraphs 0026, 0027, 0071) (Note; battery 105 is a single power supply.). Regarding claim 14, D’Souza teaches wherein the control circuit is configured to provide, as the supply voltage for the differential amplifier, an electrical voltage between a positive and negative power supplies [i.e., specified negative supply voltage and a specified positive supply voltage] (fig.1; paragraphs 0026, 0030, 0072) (Note; in paragraph 0072, positive and negative power supplies are the claimed “specified negative supply voltage and a specified positive supply voltage”.). Regarding claim 15, D’Souza teaches a signal processing device configured to receive a digital audio signal, to convert the digital audio signal into an analog audio signal, and to provide the analog audio signal as the input signal to the level converter or the differential amplifier, wherein the signal processing device is further configured to ascertain the maximum amplitude of the input signal using the digital input signal (fig.11; paragraphs 0084-0092) (Note; paragraphs 0084-0092 and figure 11 teach digital control by supply reference block 1120.). Regarding claim 16, D’Souza teaches wherein the signal processing device is configured to process the digital signal using a digital signal processor and subsequently to convert the processed digital signal into an analog audio signal (fig.9B; paragraph 0090) (Note; paragraph 0090 teaches conversion blocks 1130L, 1130R.). Claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 10. Furthermore, D’Souza teaches a sound generation system (fig.1, 8; paragraphs 0071-0074). Regarding claim 18, D’Souza teaches wherein the sound generator includes a microelectromechanical system which includes a piezo speaker 150A or 150B in figure 1 [i.e., electrostatically controlled membrane] (fig.1; paragraphs 0025-0026) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Souza et al. (US Pub. No. 2015/0045095) in view of UGI et al. (Japanese Pub. No. JP2003250191A) . Regarding claim 12, D’Souza teaches wherein the control circuit is configured to set a supply voltage for the preamplifiers 140A, 140B [i.e., level converter] (paragraph 0030) (Note; in paragraph 0030, D’Souza teaches that the "preamplifiers 140A, 140B" obtain a "fixed supply voltage from a regulated power supply" whereas, UGI teaches a supply voltage based on the maximum amplitude of the input signal). However, D’Souza does not specifically teach a supply voltage based on the maximum amplitude of the input signal. UGI teaches a supply voltage based on the maximum amplitude of the input signal (fig.1; paragraphs 0009-0027, regulation of the supply voltages +Vcc and -Vcc of each of the amplifier stages IC1, IC2 and IC3). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify D’Souza to incorporate the feature of a supply voltage based on the maximum amplitude of the input signal in D’Souza’s invention as taught by UGI. The motivation for the modification is to do so in order to provide proper supply voltage based on the amplitude of the input signal. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD S ELAHEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7536. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday; 8:30AM to 5:00PM EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FAN TSANG can be reached on 571-272-7547. 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). /MD S ELAHEE/ MD SHAFIUL ALAM ELAHEE Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694 May 29, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/855,035 Page 2 Art Unit: 2694 Application/Control Number: 18/855,035 Page 3 Art Unit: 2694 Application/Control Number: 18/855,035 Page 4 Art Unit: 2694 Application/Control Number: 18/855,035 Page 5 Art Unit: 2694 Application/Control Number: 18/855,035 Page 6 Art Unit: 2694 Application/Control Number: 18/855,035 Page 7 Art Unit: 2694 Application/Control Number: 18/855,035 Page 8 Art Unit: 2694
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 08, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12682901
SENSITIVE DATA CONTROL
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12676145
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONCURRENTLY JOINING VOICE AND WEB CHANNELS
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12664988
EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE SCORE
2y 6m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12663299
NOISE LEVEL PREDICTION SYSTEM FOR VEHICLE
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12664361
System and Method of Programmer-Interpreter Approach for Large Language Model Post-Editing
1y 12m 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.1%)
3y 3m (~1y 6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 845 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