Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/048,055

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR SPECTRUM MATCHING FOR HYPERSPECTRAL AND MULTISPECTRAL DATA

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Oct 20, 2022
Examiner
LEE, SANGKYUNG
Art Unit
2858
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Tata Consultancy Services Limited
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
66%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allow Rate
86 granted / 141 resolved
-7.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +5% lift
Without
With
+4.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
187
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
§103
54.6%
+14.6% vs TC avg
§102
11.8%
-28.2% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 141 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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/20/2026 has been entered. Status of the claims The argument received on February, 20 2026 has been acknowledged and entered. Claims 1, 3-5, 7, 9-11, 13, 15-16 are amended. Claims 19-20 are newly added. Thus, claims 1-20 are currently pending. Response to Arguments Applicant’s amendments filed February, 20 2026 with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection. 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 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Specifically, representative Claim 1 recites: A processor implemented of spectrum matching for hyperspectral and multispectral data method comprising: receiving, via one or more hardware processors, a target spectrum of a target object for performing an optimal spectrum matching with a reference spectrum, wherein the target spectrum comprises a first set of primitives and the reference spectrum comprises a second set of primitives represented in a two-dimensional space, wherein a x-axis and a y-axis in the two-dimensional space pertains to a wavelength and a reflectance respectively, wherein the target spectrum is received as a single spectrum or as a collection of spectra, in an image format or a non-image format wherein the collection of spectra of representative materials including samples from a vegetation, impervious surfaces, and a soil selected, and wherein the set of primitives of the target spectrum and the reference spectrum are curves or a set of points; transforming, via the one or more hardware processors, each primitive in the first set of primitives of the target spectrum to at least one primitive in the second set of primitives of the reference spectrum using at least one of a first transformation method, a second transformation method and a third transformation method to obtain a set of transformations, wherein the transformation methods are selected based on a sensitivity, a measure of changes in a distance per unit perturbations in an original spectrum, wherein the original spectrum is added with a white noise, to measure a match between the original spectrum and a changed spectra, wherein an increase in the distance is indicated, in accordance with disturbances which are added in the original spectrum, and the distance is divided by total perturbations added, wherein each transformation in the set of transformations incurs a transformation cost, wherein the first transformation method corresponds to an edit distance based method, based on a distance measured between the first set of primitives and the second set of primitives, wherein the second transformation method corresponds to a Hungarian based method, based on x and y dimension distance measure between the first set of primitives and the second set of primitives, wherein the third transformation method corresponds to a piece-wise angular distance based method, based on angular difference and length difference between the first set of primitives and the second set of primitives, and wherein the edit distance based method, the Hungarian based method, the piece-wise angular distance based method are computed for the vegetation, the impervious surfaces, and the soil; obtaining, via the one or more hardware processors, a set of optimal transformations of the first set of primitives to the second set of primitives by optimizing the set of transformations; obtaining, via the one or more hardware processors, a set of global transformation costs by taking the sum of transformation cost corresponding to each optimal transformation of the set of optimal transformations; and obtaining, via the one or more hardware processors, an optimal transformation cost by optimizing the set of global transformation costs using an optimization technique, wherein the optimal transformation cost represents the optimal spectrum matching of the target spectrum with the reference spectrum. The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements.” Step 1: under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (Process). Step 2A, Prong One: under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the groupings of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation that falls into the grouping of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that covers mathematical concepts - mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations and mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion. For example, the limitations of “spectrum matching for hyperspectral and multispectral data (paras. [0028], [0031]),” “a x-axis and a y-axis in the two-dimensional space pertains to a wavelength and a reflectance respectively, wherein the target spectrum is received as a single spectrum or as a collection of spectra, in an image format or a non-image format, wherein the collection of spectra of representative materials including samples from a vegetation, impervious surfaces, and a soil selected, and wherein the set of primitives of the target spectrum and the reference spectrum are curves or a set of points (paras. [029], [035] of instant application) ” and “additional limitation of “transforming, each primitive in the first set of primitives of the target spectrum to at least one primitive in the second set of primitives of the reference spectrum using at least one of a first transformation method, a second transformation method and a third transformation method to obtain a set of transformations, wherein each transformation in the set of transformations incurs a transformation cos, wherein the transformation methods are selected based on a sensitivity, a measure of changes in a distance per unit perturbations in an original spectrum, wherein the original spectrum is added with a white noise, to measure a match between the original spectrum and a changed spectra, wherein an increase in the distance is indicated, in accordance with disturbances which are added in the original spectrum, and the distance is divided by total perturbations added (see para. [030] and table 1 of instant application),” “wherein the first transformation method corresponds to an edit distance based method, based on a distance measured between the first set of primitives and the second set of primitives, wherein the second transformation method corresponds to a Hungarian based method, based on x and y dimension distance measure between the first set of primitives and the second set of primitives (see para. [011]), wherein the third transformation method corresponds to a piece-wise angular distance based method, based on angular difference and length difference between the first set of primitives and the second set of primitives (see para. [035]), and wherein the edit distance based method, the Hungarian based method, the piece-wise angular distance based method are computed for the vegetation, the impervious surfaces, and the soil (see paras. [030]-[031]),” “obtaining a set of optimal transformations of the first set of primitives to the second set of primitives by optimizing the set of transformations (see paras. [032], [045], tables 2-4),” “obtaining a set of global transformation costs by taking the sum of transformation cost corresponding to each optimal transformation of the set of optimal transformations (see paras. [043]-[044]),” “obtaining an optimal transformation cost by optimizing the set of global transformation costs using an optimization technique, wherein the optimal transformation cost represents the optimal spectrum matching of the target spectrum with the reference spectrum (see paras. [033]-[034] and [042]-[044],” as drafted, are a mathematical calculations. Especially, the additional elements of “the collection of spectra of representative materials including samples from a vegetation, impervious surfaces, and a soil selected “ is just a description of the data receive and used for mathematical calculations (i.e. merely parts of mathematical calculation). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mathematical concepts, then it falls within the “Mathematical Concepts” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claims 7 and 13. Step 2A, Prong Two: under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application. In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Therefore, none of the additional elements indicate a practical application. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B. Step 2B: The above claims comprise the following additional elements: In Claim 1: a processor implemented method (preamble); receiving, via one or more hardware processors, a target spectrum of a target object for performing an optimal spectrum matching with a reference spectrum, wherein the target spectrum comprises a first set of primitives and the reference spectrum comprises a second set of primitives represented in a two-dimensional space; In Claim 7: a system (preamble); one or more communication interfaces; one or more hardware processors coupled to the memory via the one or more communication interfaces, wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured by the instructions; receiving, via one or more hardware processors, a target spectrum of a target object for performing an optimal spectrum matching with a reference spectrum, wherein the target spectrum comprises a first set of primitives and the reference spectrum comprises a second set of primitives represented in a two-dimensional space; and In Claim 13: one or more non-transitory machine-readable information storage mediums comprising one or more instructions which when executed by one or more hardware processors (preamble); receiving, via one or more hardware processors, a target spectrum of a target object for performing an optimal spectrum matching with a reference spectrum, wherein the target spectrum comprises a first set of primitives and the reference spectrum comprises a second set of primitives represented in a two-dimensional space. The generically recited a processor implemented method, system, memory, and one or more non-transitory machine-readable information storage mediums comprising one or more instructions which when executed by one or more hardware processors are high level generality to perform the abstract idea addressed above (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). The additional element of “receiving, via one or more hardware processors, a target spectrum of a target object for performing an optimal spectrum matching with a reference spectrum, wherein the target spectrum comprises a first set of primitives and the reference spectrum comprises a second set of primitives represented in a two-dimensional space” is insignificant (data gathering) extra-solution activity that cannot reasonably integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). This additional limitation is merely data gathering or receiving data necessary to perform the abstract idea (i.e., the mathematical calculations). The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these additional elements/steps are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the relevant based on the prior art of record (Yao (CN 113358224A), Zhu (CN104573732A), Birdwell (US 2013/0173632 A1), Birdwell`344 (US 2015/0317344 A1)). For example, Yao, Zhu, Birdwell and Birdwell`344 teach receiving, via one or more hardware processors, a target spectrum of a target object for performing an optimal spectrum matching with a reference spectrum, wherein the target spectrum comprises a first set of primitives and the reference spectrum comprises a second set of primitives represented in a two-dimensional space (see page 21, lines 34-36, page 4, lines 14-15, page 9, lines 24-25 of Yao; page 5, lines 6-7, page 5, lines 14-15 of Zhu; paras. [0004], [0011]-[0013], [0030]-[0032], [0044]-[0050] of Birdwell; paras. [0004], [0025], [0030], [0035], [0110], [0141], [0230]-[0231] of Birdwell`344). The independent claims, therefore, are not patent eligible. Regarding claims 2, 8, and 14, The additional element of “the target spectrum and the reference spectrum are at least one of a hyperspectral spectrum or a multispectral spectrum” is well-understood, routine, and conventional in the relevant based on the prior art of record (page 4, lines 14-15, page 9, lines 24-25 of Yao; page 8, lines 21-41 of Lu et al. (CN 112418057 A)). Regarding claims 3, 9, and 15, The additional element of “wherein the edit distance based method comprises: creating a first matrix for pairs of primitives from the target spectrum and the reference spectrum: calculating at least three distances with a mapped or a paired practical primitive on the reference spectrum starting from left to right and starting at a first primitive of the target spectrum, wherein one of insertion, deletion, and substitution operations is selected for calculating the at least three distances, and repeating the creating and the calculating steps for all paired practical primitives and sum up cost for the selected operations for each paired transformation to obtain total transformation cost” is mathematical calculations (see paras. [030]-[033]). Regarding claims 4, 10, and 16, The additional element of “wherein the Hungarian based method comprises: creating a second matrix of pairs of primitives from the target spectrum and the reference spectrum: mapping or transforming a primitive from the target spectrum to any other primitive in the reference spectrum, wherein a cost is associated for each transformation of the paired primitives, and calculating a cost of transformation for each pair of primitives, wherein the cost for a transformation for a pair is weighted x and y scalar difference” is mathematical calculations (see paras. [011], [030], [034]). Regarding claims 5, 11, and 17, The additional element of “wherein the piece-wise angular distance based method comprises: calculating an angular difference and a length difference between corresponding arcs of the target spectrum and the reference spectrum to generate an arc score, wherein the target spectrum and the reference spectrum are represented by two dimensions, the wavelength and the reflectance; repeating the calculation for every corresponding arc in the target spectrum and the reference spectrum; and adding the arc score corresponding to all arcs to obtain a final matching score” is mathematical calculations (see paras. [031], [035]). Regarding claims 6, 12, and 18, The additional element of “the transformation cost corresponds to one or more of (i) translation of a primitive in x and y dimensions (ii) deletion of the primitive and (iii) insertion of the primitive” is mathematical calculations (see paras. [013], [033], [037]). Regarding claims 19 and 20, The additional element of “the impervious surfaces corresponds to construction- concrete, the soil corresponds to a light yellowish brown clay, and the vegetation corresponds to a Ficus Platypoda, and wherein the edit distance based method, the Hungarian based method, the piece-wise angular distance based method are computed for the construction-concrete, the light yellowish brown clay, the Ficus Platypoda” are mathematical calculations. The additional elements is just a description of the data receive and used for mathematical calculations (i.e. merely parts of mathematical calculation). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANGKYUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3669. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm. 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, LEE RODARK can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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. /SANGKYUNG LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2858 /LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 20, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Sep 25, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §101
Jan 22, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 20, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596109
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CALIBRATING MEASURED VALUES FOR AMBIENT AIR PARAMETERS USING TRAINED MODELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12510346
MEASUREMENT METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12504751
INSPECTION SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12472569
METHOD FOR PRODUCING OR MACHINING TOOTHING
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12467979
Abnormal Cell Diagnosing Method and Battery System Applying the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
61%
Grant Probability
66%
With Interview (+4.6%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 141 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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