Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 17/978,973

VIRTUAL DRIVING SYSTEM AND ITS CONTROL METHOD

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Nov 02, 2022
Priority
Dec 30, 2021 — RE 10-2021-0193039 +1 more
Examiner
PIERRE LOUIS, ANDRE
Art Unit
2187
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Semes Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
451 granted / 663 resolved
+13.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+15.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
692
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
§103
39.0%
-1.0% vs TC avg
§102
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
§112
15.8%
-24.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 663 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 2. The amendment filed on 06/29/2026 has been received and fully considered. 3. Claims 1-19 are presented for examination. Response to Arguments 4. Applicant's arguments filed 06/29/2026 have been fully considered; they are somewhat persuasive. The previous rejection of the claims under 35 USC 112 along with the art rejection have been withdrawn; however, the amendment to the claims cause further issues as shown below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 5. 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. 5.1 Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification fails to provide any supports for the amended limitations that “the first and second collision avoidance …on which the transport cart will travel virtually while being driven in place on the rail” as specifically amended in the claims and the Examiner is unable to locate such support in the as-filed specification. If applicant feels otherwise, the Examiner respectfully invites the applicant to point to very specific portions of the specification with very clear explanation where supports could be found for the limitations as amended in the claims. Independent claims 11 and 16 inherit the same defect based on similar recitations. 6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 6.1 Claims 1-19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims provides for the limitations of transport will travel virtually while being physically driven in place on the rail; it is unclear t the examiner how said transport cart could be virtually travel on the first and second path while being physically driven in place on the rail. In fact, it does not appear to be any physically driven transport cart being performed and it is not understood how both physically and virtually can be accomplished at the same time by the claims. Independent claims 11 and 16 inherit the same defect based on similar recitations. Conclusion 7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. 7.1 Ren et al. (U.S. No. 11,155,279) teaches a rail transport system that includes: a rail, where the rail is provided with an escape passage; and a rail vehicle, where the rail vehicle includes a vehicle body and a plurality of bogies. 8. Claims 1-19 are rejected and THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. 9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE PIERRE-LOUIS whose telephone number is (571)272-8636. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-5:00 PM. 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, EMERSON C PUENTE can be reached at 571-272-3652. 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. /ANDRE PIERRE LOUIS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2187 September 5, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 02, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 29, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 10, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Sep 29, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12724172
DYNAMIC ENGINE FOR A COGNITIVE RESERVOIR SYSTEM
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12699817
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MODELING A ROCK SAMPLE
4y 6m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12692785
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR APPLICATION OF STATISTICAL CLASSIFICATION AND PATTERN RECOGNITION FOR COMPARTMENT DESIGN IN HORIZONTAL OIL WELLS
4y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12639189
SELECTING AUTOMATION SCRIPTS USING REINFORCED LEARNING
5y 5m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12605207
SYSTEM FOR DISPLAYING AN AUGMENTED REALITY AND METHOD FOR GENERATING AN AUGMENTED REALITY
4y 9m 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+15.0%)
3y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 663 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