Office Action Predictor
Application No. 17/846,428

Multitask Machine-Learning Model Training and Training Data Augmentation

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Jun 22, 2022
Examiner
WOO, ISAAC M
Art Unit
2163
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Adobe INC.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

91%
Career Allow Rate
1161 granted / 1270 resolved
Without
With
+6.9%
Interview Lift
avg trend
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
27 pending
1297
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
§103
3.8%
-36.2% vs TC avg
§102
71.4%
+31.4% vs TC avg
§112
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§101
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 . DETAILED ACTION 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 15, 2026 has been entered. Claims 12-29 are canceled. Claims 1-11 and 30-39 are pending. This action is response to the application filed on January 15, 2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 30-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Specifically claims 30 and 35-39 are directed to a computer-readable storage medium thereon for implementing and the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is silent. The USPTO recognizes that applicants may have claims directed to computer readable media that cover signals per se, which the USPTO must reject under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as covering both non-statutory subject matter and statutory subject matter. In an effort to assist the patent community in overcoming a rejection or potential rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in this situation, the USPTO suggests the following approach. A claim drawn to such a computer readable medium that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 by adding the limitation "non-transitory" to the claim. Cf. Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (suggesting that applicants add the limitation "non-human" to a claim covering a multi-cellular organism to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101). The words " computer-readable storage media (medium) " are insufficient to convey only statutory embodiments to one of ordinary skill in the art absent an explicit and deliberate limiting definition or clear differentiation between storage media and transitory media in the disclosure. Such an amendment would typically not raise the issue of new matter, even when the specification is silent because the broadest reasonable interpretation relies on the ordinary and customary meaning that includes signals per se. Thus, such a medium cannot be patentable subject matter. non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is recommended as an appropriate computer readable medium. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-11 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art made of Gordon et al (US-20210279511-A1) teaches for receiving, by a processing device, training data including a first set of training data associated with a first task involving summarization and a second set of training data associated with a second task involving classification. Gordon et al (US-20210279511-A1) teaches but fails to teach the following claimed features in combination with overall claimed limitations when interpreted in light of the specification. The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art taken as a whole does not show training, a multitask machine-learning model having a first set of layers using the first set of training data associated with the first task involving summarization and a second set of layers using the second set of training data associated with the second task involving classification, the training using a multitask learning loss function defining differing amounts of parameter sharing that decreases through successive said layers between the first and second set of layers associated with the first and second tasks, respectively; and outputting, by the processing device, a result of processing a subsequent input by the trained multitask machine-learning model and as specifically called for the claimed combinations. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Claims 1-11 would be allowable over the prior art of record because the claimed features as mentioned above in combination with other claimed features are not recited or suggested by the prior art of records. The above features in conjunction with all other limitations of the dependent and independent claims 1-11 are hereby allowed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISAAC M WOO whose telephone number is (571)272-4043. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 to 5:00. 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, Tony Mahmoudi can be reached on 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. /ISAAC M WOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 22, 2022
Application Filed
Jul 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Aug 06, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 06, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 06, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 05, 2025
Final Rejection — §101
Jan 15, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 26, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Mar 19, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12596726
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR EFFICIENT SEGMENTATION FOR FORECASTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591941
MEDIA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585552
PROTECTION, RECOVERY, AND MIGRATION OF DATABASES-AS-A-SERVICE (DBAAS) AND/OR SERVERLESS DATABASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (DBMS) IN CLOUD AND MULTI-CLOUD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585674
METADATA TAG AUTO-APPLICATION TO POSTED ENTRIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579167
DISTRIBUTED GRAPH-BASED CLUSTERING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
91%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+6.9%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1270 resolved cases by this examiner