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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/15/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1, 2, and 4-13 are objected claims.
Claims 3 and 14 are rejected claims under 35 USC § 112 Rejection.
Claim Analysis – 35 USC § 101
The new 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance published in the Federal register (Vol. 84 No.4, Jan 7, 2019 pp 50-57) has been applied and the claims are deemed as being patent eligible. In particular, in the prong 1 analysis claim 1 contains an abstract idea. However, the claims taken as a whole recite a practical application of controlling a multivariable industrial process under prong 2 analysis. There is an actuator being claimed which controls feed of the chemical or chemicals to the industrial process. Considering the factors in MPEP 2106.05(b), this actuator is somewhat particular and somewhat general, it implements steps of the method, and it is not merely extra-solution activity or field-of-use. The claims are also made more particular to some extent by the recited list of industrial processes to which the method my be applied. The examiner finds that the claim is directed to an improvement in using a particular kind of machine learning tool (one utilizing deviations between explanation values and normal explanation values, deviations between machine learning values and normal machine learning values, and between pre-processed measurement data and normal pre-processed measurement data, rather than using any one or two of these three types of values) to better control dosing amounts of chemicals in the recited industrial processes, and that the claims integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Thus claim 1 is deemed patent eligible under 35 USC 101.
Claims 2-14 are dependent claims of claim 1 and they are directed to the practical application of the parent claim, so they are also patent eligible under 35 USC 101.
Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation of “at least one estimator, which each estimator” in line 21 should be “at least one estimator, where each estimator”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-14 are likewise objected because they depend from claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
The limitations of claims 3 and 14 were amended to claim 1, so they do not further limit claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claims 3 and 14, amend claims 3 and 14 to recite further limitations, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claims comply with the statutory requirements.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KALERIA KNOX whose telephone number is (571)270-5971. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571)2722302. 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.
/KALERIA KNOX/
Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/ANDREW SCHECHTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights