Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 35/522,895

Input and output module for controller

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Nov 08, 2023
Examiner
LIGON, ANGELA CHRISTINE
Art Unit
2971
Tech Center
2900
Assignee
Gd Kong Intelligent Building Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 8m
To Grant
0%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allow Rate
12 granted / 12 resolved
+40.0% vs TC avg
Minimal -100% lift
Without
With
+-100.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 8m
Avg Prosecution
2 currently pending
Career history
14
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§112
100.0%
+60.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 12 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 . Restriction/Election The election of Embodiment 1, containing Figures 1.1-1.7, received 09/27/2025 is acknowledged. Embodiment 2 has been withdrawn from further consideration by the applicant, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being for the nonelected design. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 09/27/2025. Objections Specification The specification is objected to due to the following: The amended statement [FIG. 1.1 to FIG 1.7 show an input and output module for a controller according to embodiments of the present design, the input and output module for the controller is used in building control system, and it can be built into the controlled device, used for NFC configuration and reading statue.] should be cancelled as the word “embodiments” suggests multiple embodiments not shown in the amended elected drawings. Further, the additional description of functional attributes is unnecessary since no description of the design in the specification beyond a brief description of the drawing is generally necessary, since as a rule the illustration in the drawing views is its own best description. In re Freeman, 23 App. D.C. 226 (App. D.C. 1904). MPEP 1503.01. Reproductions The disclosure does not meet the requirements of 37 CFR § 1.1.1026 because: The size of the reproduction sheets is objected to for being various sizes. The reproductions accompanying an international application filed on paper shall be either pasted or printed directly onto a separate sheet of A4 (21.0 cm x 29.7 cm) or 8.5 x 11 inches (21.6 cm x 27.9cm). All reproduction sheets in an application must be the same size. Reproductions shall be of a quality permitting all the details of the industrial design to be clearly distinguished and permitting publication. See Hague Rule 9(2). The separate sheet of paper shall be used upright and shall not contain more than 25 reproductions. See Section 401 (c). Applicant is not required to correct the above-noted formal reproduction matter at this time; however, additional amendments may be required upon receipt of the amended replacement sheets. The applicant may wish to make amendments to place the application in better form. Claim Rejection: 35 U.S.C. § 112, (a) and (b) The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, (a) and (b), as the claimed invention is not described in such full, clear, concise and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use the same, and fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The claim is indefinite and non-enabled. Specifically, the precise shape and relative depth of areas in Figures 1.3 and 1.7 cannot be determined. One skilled in the art would necessarily resort to conjecture attempting to understand these details. Please see sketches below for identification of the non-enabled subject matter. In an effort to overcome the 35 U.S.C. § 112, (a) and (b) rejection, if these annotated areas are not included in the claim, the addition of a special description statement could be added to the Specification preceding the claim and following the Figure Descriptions to fully explain these areas. PNG media_image1.png 323 647 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 665 648 media_image2.png Greyscale Replacement Drawings 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. If all the figures on a drawing sheet are canceled, a replacement sheet is not required. A marked-up copy of the drawing sheet (labeled as “Annotated Sheet”) including an annotation showing that all the figures on that drawing sheet have been canceled must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change to the drawings. 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. When preparing new or replacement drawings, be careful to avoid introducing new matter. New matter is prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f). Conclusion Accordingly, the claim stands rejected under 35 USC 112(a) and (b), as set forth above. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA C LIGON whose telephone number is (703)756-1066. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7am-4pm. 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, Wendy L Arminio can be reached at (571) 270-0221. 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. /A.C.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2935 /SHAWN T GINGRICH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2934
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 08, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent D1104968
WIRELESS CHARGER
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent D1103097
Wireless charger
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent D1099828
APPARATUS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
Patent D1099829
ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGER
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
Patent D1098003
Battery Charger
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 14, 2025
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
100%
Grant Probability
0%
With Interview (-100.0%)
1y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 12 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