Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 17/538,989

ORGANIZING SEQUENCES FOR TRANSFORMER COMPUTE

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Nov 30, 2021
Examiner
BAKER, EZRA JAMES
Art Unit
2126
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
International Business Machines Corporation
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
42%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 42% of resolved cases
42%
Career Allowance Rate
11 granted / 26 resolved
-12.7% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 1m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
48
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
32.2%
-7.8% vs TC avg
§103
38.6%
-1.4% vs TC avg
§102
7.7%
-32.3% vs TC avg
§112
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 26 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/05/2026 has been entered. Status of Claims The present application is being examined under the claims filed 02/05/2026. Claims 1-9, 11, and 13-22 are pending. Response to Amendment This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s communication filed 02/05/2026 in response to office action mailed 01/27/2026. The Applicant’s remarks and any amendments to the claims or specification have been considered with the results that follow. Response to Arguments In response to Applicant’s arguments, each and every rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101, 103, and 112(b) has been overcome. Only rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) remain which must be resolved prior to allowance. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-9, 11, and 13-22 are deemed patentable over the prior art and eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101. However, rejections remain for claims 7 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) written description requirement which must be resolved prior to allowance. This communication warrants no examiner's reason for allowance, as the record makes evident the reason for allowance, satisfying the record "as a whole" as required by rule 37 CFR 1.104 (e). Accordingly, the reason for allowance is in all probability evident from the record and no statement for examiner's reason for allowance is necessary (see MPEP 1302.14). 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. Claims 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for failing to provide a written description of the claimed invention. Regarding Claims 7 and 19 Claim 7 recites the following limitation. Claim 19 recites a similar claim limitation. causing, via use of a management layer of the functional abstraction layers of the cloud computing environment to issue instructions within the cloud computing environment, the transformer to process the input organized batch of sequences through multiple layers of the transformer There is insufficient written description in the specification for this limitation in the claims. A review of the specification reveals that the closest portions of the description recite: (paragraph [0018]) “In another general embodiment, a system includes a processor; and logic integrated with the processor, executable by the processor, or integrated with and executable by the processor, where the logic is configured to determine a threshold sequence-size for a transformer; organize a batch of sequences according to the threshold sequence-size; and input the organized batch of sequences into the transformer.” (paragraph [0041]) “In one example, management layer 80 may provide the functions described below. Resource provisioning 81 provides dynamic procurement of computing resources and other resources that are utilized to perform tasks within the cloud computing environment. Metering and Pricing 82 provide cost tracking as resources are utilized within the cloud computing environment, and billing or invoicing for consumption of these resources. In one example, these resources may include application software licenses. Security provides identity verification for cloud consumers and tasks, as well as protection for data and other resources. User portal 83 provides access to the cloud computing environment for consumers and system administrators. Service level management 84 provides cloud computing resource allocation and management such that required service levels are met. Service Level Agreement (SLA) planning and fulfillment 85 provide pre-arrangement for, and procurement of, cloud computing resources for which a future requirement is anticipated in accordance with an SLA” That is, the specification discloses processing sequences, and separately discloses a management layer. But there is no disclosure of a management layer used to cause a transformer to process sequences. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ezra J Baker whose telephone number is (703)756-1087. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am - 8:00 pm ET. 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, David Yi can be reached at (571) 270-7519. 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. /E.J.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2126 /DAVID YI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2126
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 16 earlier events
Nov 06, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §101, §112
Dec 16, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 16, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 05, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §112
Sep 18, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12725073
METADATA GENERATION FOR INTELLIGENT ORCHESTRATION
3y 2m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12718075
METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND MEDIA FOR COMPUTER VISION USING 2D CONVOLUTION OF 4D VIDEO DATA TENSORS
4y 10m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12675712
Identity Graphing for Network Genomes
5y 0m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12619886
Frozen Model Adaptation Through Soft Prompt Transfer
3y 9m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12608619
SUPERSEDED FEDERATED LEARNING
4y 4m to grant Granted Apr 21, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
42%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+29.8%)
4y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 26 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