Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/069,322

AI TRAINING DATA CREATION SUPPORT SYSTEM, AI TRAINING DATA CREATION SUPPORT METHOD, AND AI TRAINING DATA CREATION SUPPORT PROGRAM

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Dec 21, 2022
Examiner
VU, BAI DUC
Art Unit
2162
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Hitachi, Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
588 granted / 747 resolved
+23.7% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
757
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§103
28.0%
-12.0% vs TC avg
§102
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
§112
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 747 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Response to Amendment Applicant has amended claims 1, 6, 9-11, 13 and 14 in the amendment filed on 12/9/2025. Claims 1-14 are currently pending in the present application. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed on 12/9/2025 with respect to the claims 1-14 have been considered but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Examiner’s Remarks After further reviewed Applicant's arguments (i.e., pages 12-15 of the Applicant’s Remarks, and in light of the original specification, pages 3-66), the claimed amendment filed on December 9, 2025 overcomes the 35 U.S.C. § 112 and 101 rejections. The limitations as added to the independent claims 1, 13 and 14 included additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application that would make the claims eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Claim Objections Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: As per claim 6, the claim recites “a search condition database configured to store a plurality of search condition records in which past analysis target data created in the past and a past query used for extraction of the training data regarding the past analysis target data are associated with each other” which should be amended or written as “[[a]]the search condition database configured to store a plurality of search condition records in which past analysis target data created in the past and [[a]]the past query used for extraction of the training data regarding the past analysis target data are associated with each other”. Correction is respectfully required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claims 1-14 are 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. As per claims 1, 13 and 14; the claims recite “determining a data acquisition speed associated with the processor based at least in part on a clock speed of the processor, wherein the data acquisition speed comprises an indication of a number of pieces of the first supplementary candidate data acquirable from the training database per unit time” which the underlined feature renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear as whether the underlined feature is different from the underlined feature in the limitation of “estimating a number of pieces of first supplementary candidate data to be extracted from the training database according to the first supplementary query candidate”? Clarification or correction is respectfully required. Note, the dependent claims 2-12 are also rejected because they depend on and/or do not remedy the deficiencies inherited by their parent claim 1. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objection and the rejection as set forth in this Office action. Reasons for Allowance The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: After further consideration of the prior arts of record and conducting different searches in PE2E - SEARCH, Similarity Search, Google Scholar, and ACM Digital Library, it appears that none of prior arts discloses, teaches or fairly suggests the limitations as a whole in the independent claims 1, 13 and 14. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bai D. Vu whose telephone number is (571) 270-1751. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 5:30. 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, Tony Mahmoudi can be reached at (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. /BAI D VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163 1/30/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 21, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 29, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 30, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596693
Data Visibility and Quality Management Platform
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592985
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TAGGING IN IDENTITY MANAGEMENT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS AND USES FOR SAME, INCLUDING CONTEXT BASED GOVERNANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585553
REMOTE FILE SERVICE SYSTEM FOR FILE OPERATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578871
DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12561298
MACHINE LEARNING ORIENTED INTERACTIVE TABULAR DATA QUALITY DISPLAY SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+18.1%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 747 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