Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/315,554

MULTI-PORT DC TRANSFER SWITCH BASED ON CONTROLLABLE NEGATIVE VOLTAGE SOURCE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Aug 30, 2025
Examiner
BARNIE, REXFORD N
Art Unit
2836
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Tianjin University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
11%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
52%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 11% of cases
11%
Career Allow Rate
5 granted / 46 resolved
-57.1% vs TC avg
Strong +41% interview lift
Without
With
+40.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
62 currently pending
Career history
108
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
49.5%
+9.5% vs TC avg
§102
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
§112
25.2%
-14.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 46 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Drawings Figures 1-2 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). The specification (par 3, 4) clearly discloses that these figures are “conventional” and known prior art. Figures 2-4 are objected to because the text is too small and pixelated to read. The Applicants are requested to file a corrected figure with larger text. The Applicants may consider rotating the figures, into landscape orientation, so that they can be enlarged and fit within a single page. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 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. Claims 1 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 1 is indefinite because it recites conflicting limitations for the number of main branches. Claim 1 recites “wherein X= 5 or 3” and then recites that X is both 5 (at the sending terminal) and 3 (at the receiving terminal). Claim 1 is indefinite because it uses both broad and narrow descriptions for the same limitation. Claim 1 has been amended to include the subject matter of dependent claims 2-3. This means that claim 1 recites both the broad original limitations (lines 3-8) and the narrowing dependent claim language (lines 9-end). This makes the claim indefinite. Dependent claim subject matter should be incorporated into claim 1, not copy-pasted at the end. Claim 1 broadly introduces the X main branches (original language) and then gets into the specifics of the main branches (narrow language from claims 2-3). This also causes confusion because the original language refers to one set of main branches, while the amended language refers to two sets (one at the sending terminal, a second at the receiving terminal). One broad introduction for “X main branches”) (original claim 1) conflicts with the manner in which the claim has been amended. For example, the original claim refers to “through-current vacuum switch” and the amended language refers to “controllable conduction switches”. Either this is the use of different words (broad vs narrow) for the same limitation or the Applicants are adding a second switch type without clearly defining how it exists relative to the first. These issues can be overcome by: 1) deleting the first wherein clause (that X is 5 or 3); and 2) incorporating the first and third limitations (lines 3-4 and 6-8 of claim 1) into the amended language (i.e. not copy/paste, but working the limitations into the existing language so that individual elements are clearly and distinctly presented). The Examiner is available to discuss suitable language or to review amendments before submission. Claims 4-7 are similarly rejected as they depend from, and inherit the deficiencies of, claim 1. Conclusion There is no prior art rejection. The claims would be allowable once the §112(b) rejection is overcome. The prior art does not teach or suggest a multi-port DC transfer switch with five main branches at the input and three main branches at the output, wherein the eight branches are connected to the terminals identified in the claims, wherein each main branch comprises a through-current vacuum switch. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADI AMRANY whose telephone number is (571)272-0415. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8am-7pm. 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, Rex Barnie can be reached at 5712722800 x36. 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. /ADI AMRANY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 30, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12576741
MULTI-PORT MULTI-BATTERY PACK CHARGING FOR VEHICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573869
STORAGE BATTERY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12424866
POWER CONVERSION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 23, 2025
Patent 12415435
METHOD, DEVICE AND SYSTEM OF CONTROLLING CHARGING AND DISCHARGING VEHICLES THROUGH CHARGING STATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 16, 2025
Patent null
Power Supply Switch for Dual Powered Thermostat, Power Supply for Dual Powered Thermostat, and Dual Powered Thermostat
Granted
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
11%
Grant Probability
52%
With Interview (+40.9%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 46 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