Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/169,074

TDS

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Sep 19, 2023
Examiner
APONTE, FRANCISCO JAVIER
Art Unit
2151
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
529 granted / 602 resolved
+32.9% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
623
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
13.4%
-26.6% vs TC avg
§103
46.6%
+6.6% vs TC avg
§102
15.7%
-24.3% vs TC avg
§112
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 602 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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. Receipt of Applicant’s Amendment filed 11/10/2025 is acknowledged. Claim 1 has been cancelled. Claims 2-13 have been newly added, and are pending in the application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 3. 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. 4. Claim(s) 2-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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. Claim(s) 1 states: “(d) for the newly generated descendant function until no undefined descendant functions remain in its definition…” it is unclear and confusing by current claim language if step (d) generates a new descendant function, and/or if it is referring to newly added definition of the main function, rendering the claim indefinite. Moreover, claims 5-8 states: sibling functions…after generating a function… the failed code… after generating a function…” the claim language is unclear regarding what are the sibling functions, absence of generating function step and no failure of code stipulated, only a unit test fail declared, rendering the claim indefinite. Appropriate correction is needed. Response to Arguments 5. Applicant's arguments have been considered but are moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection. In these arguments applicant relies on the amended claims and not the original ones. See above rejections under 35 USC § 103 for response to arguments. 6. Please see M.P.E.P. 2111 Claim Interpretation; Broadest Reasonable Interpretation [R-9]; 2111.01 Plain Meaning [R-9]: III. “Plain Meaning” Refers to the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art” PNG media_image1.png 18 19 media_image1.png Greyscale . Claims must be given the broadest reasonable interpretation during examination, and limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim are not read into the claims (See M.P.E.P. 2111 [R-I]). Conclusion 7. 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 extension fee 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANCISCO JAVIER APONTE whose telephone number is (571)270-7164. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 8-4. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James Trujillo can be reached on 571-272-3677. 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. /FRANCISCO J APONTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2151 03/31/2026.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 19, 2023
Application Filed
May 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Aug 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 19, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 10, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 31, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12585462
INFRASTRUCTURE PROVISIONING LOCAL AGENTS AND STORAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12572448
LEVERAGING CODE CHURN ANALYTICS TO OPTIMIZE SANITIZER PERFORMANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12566597
OPTIMISING COMPUTER PROGRAM CODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12561123
CENTER, METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12547525
VALIDATION OF CODE TRANSLATION USING INTERMEDIATE REPRESENTATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
88%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.1%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 602 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