Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/093,163

TEMPORAL CO-GRAPH MACHINE LEARNING NETWORKS

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 04, 2023
Examiner
PARK, GRACE A
Art Unit
2144
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Raytheon Company
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
421 granted / 557 resolved
+20.6% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
580
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.1%
-28.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.7%
+13.7% vs TC avg
§102
17.0%
-23.0% vs TC avg
§112
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 557 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 and Arguments Applicant’s amendment filed on February 3, 2026 has been entered and made of record. Claims 1-21 are pending and are being examined in this application. In light of Applicant’s amendments to the claims, the 112(b) and 103 rejections are withdrawn. The examiner was unable to find prior art to reject the amended claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claims 1-21 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. Figures 3 and 4 of applicant’s drawings and paragraphs 26-36 of applicant’s specification were cited as support for the amended limitations. To summarize, each node has a memory state vector (MSV). Each edge has features. A node to edge mapping (e.g., mapping 348) maps a node (e.g., node 344) in the first dynamic graph to an edge (e.g., edge 448) in the second dynamic graph or vice versa. This is so that the MSV of a node in one graph can be used as a feature for an edge in another graph, and, as a result, information is shared between the graphs. In independent claims 1, 8, and 15, as amended, there is no exchange of MSVs between the first and second dynamic graphs. The MSVs are stored as edge features in the same graph as the nodes. However, the MSV of a first node in a first graph should be stored as a feature of an edge in a second graph and vice versa in order for there to be an exchange of MSVs as described in figure 3 and associated paragraphs. Note: the independent claims appear to be directed to figure 3 and associated paragraphs since claims 5, 12, and 19 are directed to figure 4 and associated paragraphs. To address the 112(a) issue and some minor informalities, it is suggested that the independent claims be amended as follows: storing, as respective edge features, (i) a memory state vector (MSV) of a first node in a first dynamic graph as edge features in a second dynamic graph and (ii) a MSV of a second node in the second dynamic graph as edge features in the first dynamic graph, the first dynamic graph comprising ing executing, based on the edge features and the MSV of the first node and the MSV of the second node, first and second temporal graph networks (TGNs) to generate embeddings of the first and second dynamic graphs, respectively, such that the MSV of the first node stored as edge features in the second dynamic graph enables the second TGN to incorporate information about the first type into embeddings of the second dynamic graph; and determining, based on the embeddings, a likelihood of an edge between nodes of the first dynamic graph and dynamic graph. Dependent claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-21 fail to cure the deficiencies of the claims from which they respectively depend and are therefore rejected for the same reason. 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 GRACE PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-7727. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM. 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, TAMARA KYLE can be reached at (571)272-4241. 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. /Grace Park/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2144
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 04, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 20, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 20, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 03, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591807
SKETCHED AND CLUSTERED FEDERATED LEARNING WITH AUTOMATIC TUNING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585924
CAUSAL MULTI-TOUCH ATTRIBUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585728
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MACHINE LEARNING BASED INLET DEBRIS MONITORING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579150
Hybrid and Hierarchical Multi-Trial and OneShot Neural Architecture Search on Datacenter Machine Learning Accelerators
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579431
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MACHINE LEARNING BASED UNDERSTANDING OF DATA ELEMENTS IN MAINFRAME PROGRAM CODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
76%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+18.2%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 557 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