Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/860,833

WAVEGUIDE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 28, 2024
Examiner
PERENY, TYLER J
Art Unit
2843
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Robert Bosch GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
95%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 95% — above average
95%
Career Allow Rate
154 granted / 162 resolved
+27.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
187
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
57.3%
+17.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
§112
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 162 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Claim Objections Claim 16-17 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 16, Line 2, “positions of the recesses is the respective surfaces” is expected to read “positions of the recesses in the respective surfaces”. Claim 17, Line 1, “ckaun 13, whherein” is expected to read “claim 13, wherein”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 15-16 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. Claim 15 recites the limitation "the surface of the waveguide body" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, examiner has interpreted “the surface of the waveguide body” to read “a surface of a waveguide body of the waveguide” By virtue of its dependency on claim 15, claim 16 is also rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 13-15 & 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ehrlinger et al. (US 4,550,296), hereinafter Ehr. Regarding claim 13, Ehr discloses, in figure 1, a waveguide, comprising: two waveguide parts (1a & 1b), each of the two waveguide parts having a respective waveguide body and a respective part of at least one waveguide channel (1a has waveguide body 9a and channel 4 and waveguide part 1b has waveguide body 9b and channel 5), the respective parts of the at last one waveguide channel being arranged to form the at least one waveguide channel when the two waveguide parts are joined together (Col. 2, Lines 16-19, “Lower and upper parts 1a and 1b have respective front walls 9a and 9b which are constructed to define in the folded-closed position a portion of a rectangular waveguide”), the opposing surfaces of the two waveguide parts being parallel (opposing surfaces of parts 1b and 1a are parallel to each other, see figure 1); wherein a recess is provided in a side wall of the waveguide channel (Col. 2, Lines 53-54, “channel 8 provided in upper part 1b opens into one side wall surface 11 of upper waveguide bowl 5”), a width and the height of the recess being substantially smaller than half the wavelength of a signal for which the at least one waveguide channel is configured (Col. 2, Lines 65-68, “the broad dimension of the channel 8 is below 1/2λ.sub.o, with λ.sub.o being the free space wavelength of the highest transmitted frequency.”). Regarding claim 14, Ehr discloses the waveguide according to claim 13, and continues to disclose, in figure 1, wherein the recess (8) is provided perpendicularly to the side wall in the side wall (recess 8 is provided perpendicularly to the side wall 11 in the side wall of the waveguide). Regarding claim 15, as best understood based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection made above, Ehr discloses the waveguide according to claim 13, and continues to disclose, in figure 1, wherein the recess (8) is provided in a surface of a waveguide body of the waveguide (recess 8 in provided in a surface of the waveguide body formed by waveguide body 9a & 9b). Regarding claim 20, Ehr discloses, in figure 1, a system, comprising: a waveguide (formed by waveguide channels 4 & 5), which has at least one waveguide channel (channel formed by 4 & 5), and: (i) a further waveguide or (ii) a circuit board (Col. 2, Lines 12-13, “microstrip 15 composed of a dielectric substrate 2 having a microstrip conductor structure 3”), the at least one waveguide channel being connected at its output to the further waveguide or to the circuit board (Col. 2, Lines 44-48, “To couple a waveguide mode to microstrip conductor 3, a microstrip conductor portion 6 of microstrip conductor 3 is provided on substrate 2 to act as a coupling probe. It enters into the waveguide at a side thereof”), wherein a recess is provided in a side wall of the at least one waveguide channel (Col. 2, Lines 53-54, “channel 8 provided in upper part 1b opens into one side wall surface 11 of upper waveguide bowl 5”), a width and a height of the recess being smaller than half the wavelength of a signal for which the at least one waveguide channel is configured (Col. 2, Lines 65-68, “the broad dimension of the channel 8 is below 1/2λ.sub.o, with λ.sub.o being the free space wavelength of the highest transmitted frequency.”). Regarding claim 21, Ehr discloses the system according to claim 20, and continues to disclose, in figure 1, wherein the recess (8) is provided perpendicularly to the side wall in the side wall (recess 8 is provided perpendicularly to the side wall 11 in the side wall of the waveguide). Regarding claim 22, Ehr discloses the system according to claim 20, and continues to disclose, in figure 1, wherein the recess (8) is provided in a surface of a waveguide body of the waveguide (recess 8 in provided in a surface of the waveguide body formed by waveguide body 9a & 9b). 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, 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 16-17 & 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ehr in view of Westenkirchner et al. (US 2022/0131244 A1), hereinafter Westen. Regarding claim 16, Ehr discloses the waveguide according to claim 15, but fails to disclose wherein, in each of the two waveguide parts, a recess is provided in a respective surface, and positions of the recesses is the respective surfaces correspond so that, in an assembled state of the waveguide, the respective recesses fit together such that they form a common recess. However, Westen discloses, in figure 4 & 5, wherein, in each of the two waveguide parts (waveguide part 12 & 1), a recess is provided in a respective surface (recess 8 or 9), and positions of the recesses in the respective surfaces correspond so that, in an assembled state of the waveguide, the respective recesses fit together such that they form a common recess (recesses 8, 8’ and 9, 9’ fit together such that they form a common recess, respectively, see figure 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the recesses of Westen in the waveguide parts of Ehr, to achieve the benefit of suppressing “the propagation of electromagnetic waves by destructive interference and/or by lengthening the path for propagating the electromagnetic wave along the surface of the waveguide” (Westen, Para [0030]). Regarding claim 17, Ehr discloses the waveguide according to claim 13, but fails to disclose wherein each of the two waveguide parts has a plurality of recesses, which are arranged next to one another. However, Westen discloses, in figure 4 & 5, wherein each of the two waveguide parts has a plurality of recesses (each waveguide part 12 & 1 has recesses 8 & 9), which are arranged next to one another (recesses 8 & 9 are arranged next to one another, see figure 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the recesses of Westen in the waveguide parts of Ehr, to achieve the benefit of further suppressing the propagation of electromagnetic waves along the surface of the waveguide (Westen, Para [0028]). Regarding claim 23, Ehr discloses the system according to claim 20, but fails to disclose wherein the waveguide has a plurality of recesses. However, Westen discloses, in figure 4 & 5, wherein each of the two waveguide parts has a plurality of recesses (each waveguide part 12 & 1 has recesses 8 & 9), which are arranged next to one another (recesses 8 & 9 are arranged next to one another, see figure 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the recesses of Westen in the waveguide parts of Ehr, to achieve the benefit of further suppressing the propagation of electromagnetic waves along the surface of the waveguide (Westen, Para [0028]). Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ehr in view of Hörberg et al. (US 2021/0126335 A1), hereinafter Hörberg. Regarding claim 24, Ehr discloses the system according to claim 20, but fails to disclose wherein the waveguide has a choke, and the recess in the side wall of the waveguide channel is provided toward the choke. However, Hörberg discloses, in figure 6, wherein the waveguide has a choke (Para [0107], “33 is a radio-frequency, RF, choke”), and the recess in the side wall of the waveguide channel is provided toward the choke (recess extending between side wall 6 and metallized waveguide 3 provided towards the choke portion 33). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the choke of Hörberg in the waveguide of Ehr, to achieve the benefit of suppress resonances due to RF leakage in the gap of the waveguide (Hörberg, Para [0103]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 18-19 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYLER J PERENY whose telephone number is (571)272-4189. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5. 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, Lincoln Donovan can be reached at 571-272-1988. 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. /TYLER J PERENY/ Examiner, Art Unit 2842
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 28, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597688
PHASE SHIFTERS WITH LOW AMPLITUDE VARIATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597905
IMPEDANCE MATCHING NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592679
MULTIPLEXER, RADIO-FREQUENCY MODULE, AND COMMUNICATION APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587167
HIGH QUALITY FACTOR SAW RESONATORS WITH SHARED REFLECTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586881
MULTILAYERED FILTER DEVICE
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
95%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+5.8%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 162 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