DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 27 July 2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 4-7, 9-11, 14-19, and 21-51 are pending in the present application. Claims 1, 4, and 11 were amended, and new claims 21-51 were added. Claims 2, 3, 8, 12, 13, and 20 were cancelled. In the response filed 27 July 2026.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guttman US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0154273 A1. In view of Guttman US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0294986 A1.
Regarding claim 35, Guttman teaches the following:.
A system for inferring knowledge about a manufacturing process using manufacturing equipment, [note: Abstract, “methods for inference models are provided.”; Figure 1A Apparatus 200a, 200b, PC (113), Tablet (112); Figure 2A memory, processor; Figure 2B sensor] comprising:
one or more sensors configured to determine one or more metrics associated with the manufacturing process, wherein the one or more metrics comprises one or more metrics of the manufacturing equipment [note: Figure 1A, Figure 2A and 2B; paragraphs 0060-0062, sensors and measurements or metrics ]; and
a computing device, in direct or indirect communication with the one or more sensors, the computing device comprising [note: Figure 1A, Figure 2A and 2B; paragraphs 0060-0062, sensors and measurements or metrics]:
a memory [note: figure 1A, 2A and 2B]; and
one or more processors programmed or otherwise configured to perform operations comprising [note: Figure 1A, Figure 2A and 2B; paragraphs 0060-0062, sensors and measurements or metrics];:
(a) receiving, from one or more sensors, the one or more metrics associated with the manufacturing process [note: paragraph 0106, receiving first and second input data];
(b) generating, using one or more individual models stored at the memory, one or more outputs corresponding to the manufacturing process based on the one or more metrics [note: paragraph 0027, “generating inference models”; figure 5 and figure 9], and
(c) using one or more ensemble models stored at the memory to generate one or more inferences about the manufacturing process based on a combination or an aggregation of the one or more outputs generated by the one or more individual models [note: paragraph 0109, first inference model, training, means for labeling; “a plurality of inference models may have a hierarchy of inference models”; paragraph 0111, inference model may include one or more other models such as regression model and segment model; also see paragraphs 0006, 0088; 0089; paragraph 0027 rules. and paragraph 0132, data requests may specify a rule for input data and how it should be applied to model.].
Although Guttman 2017/0154273 A1 teach the invention, they do not explicitly disclose step c. However, Guttman 2019/0294986 A1 teach step c as follows with respect to one or more ensemble modes [see: paragraph 0136, a list of alternative inference models; paragraph 0138-0139, a particular personalized device may be configured to replace the inference model currently used such as an additional inference model in ensemble model]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the effective filing date to have combined the cited reference since they are both directed to the same field of invention and both references teach variation in models may be used so as to enhance and/or customize the results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4-7, 9-11, 14-19, 31-34, and 36-51 are allowed. Applicants amendment and remarks were found persuasive.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 27 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive
ARGUMENT: Claims 1 and 20 were rejected under 35 USC 103 over Guttman US Publication No. 2017/0154273 A1 in view of Guffman et al. US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0294986 A1. The claims have been amended to incorporate allowable dependent claims. .
RESPONSE: The rejection has been withdrawn; however the examiner notes new claim 35 has been rejected. The examiner notes new claim 35 is substantially similar to previous claim 1; therefore art has been applied.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRETA ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Hassan Mahmoudi can be reached at 571-272-4078. 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.
/GRETA L ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163
Prosecution Insights