Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 17/885,261

INSULATING MEDIUM DISCHARGE STREAMER SIMULATION METHOD CONSIDERING OFFSET AND BIFURCATION

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Aug 10, 2022
Examiner
MAPAR, BIJAN
Art Unit
2189
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Xi'An Jiaotong University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
317 granted / 470 resolved
+12.4% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
493
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
31.1%
-8.9% vs TC avg
§103
39.7%
-0.3% vs TC avg
§102
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
§112
11.7%
-28.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 470 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 . 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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea (mathematical relationships) without significantly more. Examiner notes that due to the extreme length of the mathematical equations and calculations detailed by the claims, the claim features will be analyzed by their enumerated steps. Claim 1 recites: First step: arranging an insulating medium in an electric field environment, measuring … (insignificant extra-solution activity in the form of mere data gathering as per MPEP 2106.05(g). The details provided here are not for how the data is measured or the medium is arranged for measurement, but instead specify what numerical data is being collected. As such, the mere collection of this data is tangential to the invention, with the focus on the numerical data which is later used for mathematical calculations.) Second step: constructing a simulation model (the model is defined as a sequence of mathematical calculations and equations, and is effectively a mathematical algorithm. Its link to the insulation medium is merely generally linking the use of the exception to the technical field of insulation mediums as per MPEP 2106.05(h).) Third step: calculating the probability of bifurcation occurring (further mathematical calculations that are within the scope of mathematical relationships) Fourth step: drawing a streamer bifurcation position (further mathematical calculations that are within the scope of mathematical relationships) Fifth step making a 180° cambered surface or arc (this is reciting generating numerical geometry by its mathematical relationships to other numerical parameters in a coordinate system, it is not reciting any physical manufacturing operations. It amounts to further mathematical calculations that are within the scope of mathematical relationships) Sixth step: drawing Nbranch∈[Nbs, Nbb] effective development points (further mathematical calculations that are within the scope of mathematical relationships) Seventh step: taking a plane of which the normal vector is parallel to the development direction (further mathematical calculations that are within the scope of mathematical relationships) Eighth step: correcting the average distance between molecules (further mathematical calculations that are within the scope of mathematical relationships) This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites the following additional elements: 1) mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (note this is not explicitly recited in the claims, but even a generous interpretation to include computer implementation as per ¶58 of the specification (“present disclosure can be solved by using a common computer”) results in only a generic computer being used), 2) generally linking the use of the exception to the technical field of insulating mediums, and 3) insignificant extra-solution activity in the form of mere data gathering (measuring numerical data from an insulating medium). The computer is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a common computer performing a generic computer function of executing instructions and storing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. The specification that numerical data is gathered is only tangentially linked to the calculation and analysis steps, and does not meaningfully limit the claim. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a computer to perform the claimed steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself. The addition of insignificant extra-solution activity does not amount to an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. Claims 2-4 recite only further details of the mathematical calculations and relationships discussed above in regards to claim 1. They remain ineligible for the same reasons. It is unclear at this time how the claims could be amended to render them eligible under 35 USC 101 without introducing unsupported new matter. Conclusion The claims as presented distinguish over the prior art as a whole by virtue of their extremely detailed limitations regarding electron avalanches generated by bifurcations based on a hydrodynamic drift diffusion model (claim 1, second step). The closest prior art is set forth below, with a brief summary of what it does and does not disclose. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Madshaven (Madshaven, I. (2020). Simulating electron-avalanche-driven positive streamers in dielectric liquids.) describes in detail the simulation of electron avalanche driven positive streamers in dielectric liquids. It does not, however, utilize consideration of bifurcation points, as its consideration of bifurcation is limited to illustrating these points on the modeling results in Fig. 28 (rather than utilizing these points in its calculations to generate the results). Najafi (Najafi, M. N. (2019). An electronic avalanche model for metal–insulator transition in two dimensional electron gas. The European Physical Journal B, 92(8), 172.) describes an electron avalanche model, but not in the context of a discharge streamer being simulated or any bifurcation points. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BIJAN MAPAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3674. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 11:00-8:30. 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, Rehana Perveen can be reached at 571-272-3676. 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. /BIJAN MAPAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2189
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 10, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Apr 04, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602037
METHODS AND APPARATUS TO GENERATE A PREDICTIVE ASSET HEALTH QUANTIFIER OF A TURBINE ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596856
ASSET EVALUATION SYSTEM FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE SIMULATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596860
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR HARDWARE ACCELERATION OF MASKING AND NORMALIZING DATA WITH A TRIANGULAR INPUT MASK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589553
EVALUATION OF 3D PRINTED OBJECTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585845
FUSION OF PHYSICS AND AI BASED MODELS FOR END-TO-END DATA SYNTHESIZATION AND VALIDATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
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
67%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+23.0%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 470 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month