Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/216,667

OVERLOAD CAPABILITY AND REMAINING LIFE OF AN ELECTRICAL ASSET

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Jun 30, 2023
Examiner
ZHANG, HAIDONG
Art Unit
2858
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Eaton Intelligent Power Limited
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
379 granted / 468 resolved
+13.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
483
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
13.4%
-26.6% vs TC avg
§103
45.6%
+5.6% vs TC avg
§102
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
§112
24.7%
-15.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 468 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Status of claims Claims 3, 5-6 and 11-16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101. Claims 1-2, 4 and 7-10 are allowed. 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 3, 5-6 and 11-16 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 3, claim 3 recites the limitation "the electrical asset" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear what electrical asset the “the electrical asset” is referring to. Regarding claim 5, claim 5 recites the limitation "the electrical asset" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear what electrical asset the “the electrical asset” is referring to. Regarding claim 6, claim 6 recites the limitation "the electrical asset" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear what electrical asset the “the electrical asset” is referring to. Regarding claim 11, claim 11 recites the limitation "the electrical asset" in lines 8-9 and last four lines. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear what electrical asset the “the electrical asset” is referring to. Regarding claim 13, claim 13 recites the limitation "the electrical asset" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear what electrical asset the “the electrical asset” is referring to. Regarding claim 15, claim 15 recites the limitation "the electrical asset" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear what electrical asset the “the electrical asset” is referring to. Regarding claim 12-15, claims 12-15 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because claims 12-15 depend on all claim limitations of claim 11. Regarding claim 16, claim 16 recites the limitation "the insulation" in both line 6 and line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear what insulation the “the insulation” is referring to. 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. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Regarding claim 16: 16. A monitoring apparatus configured to: receive measured data from an electrical apparatus; determine a load forecast based on the measured data; determine whether a pre-determined time interval has elapsed; and after the pre-determined time interval has elapsed: estimate an actual amount of life lost for the insulation during the pre-determined time interval that elapsed based on the measured data; estimate a predicted amount of life lost for the insulation during one or more future time intervals based on the load forecast; and estimate a remaining service life for the electrical apparatus based on the actual amount of life lost and the predicted amount of life lost. Analysis Steps for claim 16: Step 1: Is claim 16 claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, claim 16 recites a monitoring apparatus which is within one of the 4 statutory categories the process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter. Step 2a) Prong One: Does claim 16 recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? Yes, claim 16 recites “determine a load forecast based on the measured data; determine whether a pre-determined time interval has elapsed” may be done by human mentally prediction and determine a load forecast by mentally analyze the measure data, and mentally check to determine if a pre-determined time interval has elapsed or not, as a result; therefore, activities performed by human mentally are abstract idea. Yes, claim 16 recites “after the pre-determined time interval has elapsed: estimate an actual amount of life lost for the insulation during the pre-determined time interval that elapsed based on the measured data; estimate a predicted amount of life lost for the insulation during one or more future time intervals based on the load forecast; and estimate a remaining service life for the electrical apparatus based on the actual amount of life lost and the predicted amount of life lost” may be done by mathematical calculation, when interpreting these limitations in view of paragraphs [0061]-[0098] where mathematical Equaitons (1)-(19) are used in estimate the actual amount of life, predicted amount of life, and the remaining service life; therefore, performing mathematical calculations by using mathematical Equaitons are abstract idea. Step 2a) Prong Two: Does claim 16 recite additional element that integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application? No, claim 16 recites additional elements “A monitoring apparatus” which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas. When interpreting claim 16 in view of Fig. 2 and paragraphs [0048]-[0049] of applicant’s publish application, monitoring apparatus may be interpreted as a general purpose computer having a general purpose central processing unit (CPU) 252 and electronic storage 254. Using the CPU of a general purpose computer (the monitoring apparatus) to process the collected data stored in the electronic storage (e.g. computer storage/memory) to compute and estimate *** which does not integrate such abstract ideas (the mathematical calculations) into a practical application. No, claim 16 recites additional elements “receive measured data from an electrical apparatus” which is a pre-solution activity merely using this electrical apparatus (recited at high level, basically any sensor capable of performing data mesurement) in collecting measurement data which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas. Step 2b): Does claim 16 recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the Judicial Exception? No, when considering claim 16 as a whole, it does not amount to significantly more than judicial exception. There are no additional elements recited in the claim beyond the abstract ideas. Therefore, claim 16 is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. PNG media_image1.png 949 690 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 690 768 media_image2.png Greyscale Prior Art of Record The prior art made of record considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hyde et al. (US 2011/0012616) teaches “power transmission line system 200 having "self-reconditioning" insulators. System 200 includes power transmission lines 210 supported by insulators 220, which are coupled to an insulator surface reconditioner 230. System 200 may include a controller 250 configured to coordinate operation of surface reconditioner 230 to keep the surfaces in good insulating condition. System 200 may also include a sensor arrangement 240 configured to monitor insulator, line conditions and/or weather conditions. Sensor arrangement 240 may generate appropriate reporting signals to controller 250, surface reconditioner 230 and/or other external devices” (e.g. fig. 2, [0057]). Brown et al. (US 2013/0176046) teaches “A system includes a transformer testing system that includes a mobile platform configured to couple to a vehicle and an impulse testing system coupled to the mobile platform. The impulse testing system includes an impulse generator tower disposed in a lowered position along the mobile platform during transport by the vehicle. The transformer testing system also includes a lift system coupled to the mobile platform. The lift system is configured to lift the impulse generator tower from the lowered position to a raised position. The impulse testing system is configured to perform an impulse test of a high voltage power transformer while the impulse generator tower is disposed in the raised position. The transformer testing system also includes a protective cover disposed on the mobile platform. The protective cover is configured to surround a region having the impulse testing system” (e.g. abstract, fig. 2). Wilson et al. (US 2013/0076389) teaches “an exemplary electrical monitoring system 10 for monitoring an operation of an electric motor system 12. In the exemplary embodiment, electrical monitoring system 10 includes an electric current monitoring device 14 and a current transformer assembly 16 coupled to electric current monitoring device 14. Electric motor system 12 includes a rotating electric motor 18 that is coupled to an electrical power source 20, such as an electric power grid of a utility company. Electric motor 18 includes a plurality of stator windings (not shown), and is coupled to electrical power source 20 via one or more conductors 22. In the exemplary embodiment, electric motor 18 includes a first conductor 24 and a second conductor 26. Conductors 24 and 26 channel substantially similar currents in opposite directions between electric motor 18 and power source 20. Moreover, in the exemplary embodiment, first conductor 24 carries a first current 28 in a first direction, represented by arrow 29, and second conductor 26 carries a second current 30 in a second direction, represented by arrow 31, where second current 30 is approximately equal to first current 28, and where second direction 31 is opposite to first direction 29” (e.g. fig. 1, [0013]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-2, 4 and 7-10 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding independent claim 1, the cited and/or searched prior arts either singularly or in combination fail to teaches all the limitations of independent claim 1, in particular the claim limitation of “estimate a predicted amount of life lost for the insulation during one or more future time intervals based on the load forecast; and estimate a remaining service life for the electrical apparatus based on the actual amount of life lost and the predicted amount of life lost”; therefore, independent claim 1 is allowed, as are its dependent claims 2, 4 and 7-10. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAIDONG ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5815. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Huy Phan can be reached on (571) 272-7924. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /HAIDONG ZHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 30, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112
Aug 25, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584956
HEATER DRIVE CONTROLLING APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC COMPONENT HANDLING APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC COMPONENT TESTING APPARATUS, AND HEATER DRIVE CONTROLLING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578495
SENSOR BLOCK FOR MAGNETISM MEASUREMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571858
ALL-IN-ONE SENSING APPARATUS FOR TRANSFORMER BUSHING TAP MONITORING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12535535
MALFUNCTION DIAGNOSIS APPARATUS AND MALFUNCTION DIAGNOSIS METHOD FOR WIRELESS POWER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12529681
PROBE FOR CHECKING THE PRESENCE OF PARAMAGNETIC PARTICLES IN A TANK
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+13.3%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 468 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