Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/241,059

COMMON HANDLER FOR MULTITUDE OF CRASH FAILURES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 31, 2023
Examiner
SHELTON, GABRIELLA KANANI
Art Unit
2113
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
DELL PRODUCTS, L.P.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
10 granted / 16 resolved
+7.5% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
11 currently pending
Career history
27
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
§103
40.6%
+0.6% vs TC avg
§102
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
§112
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 16 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
Non-Final Rejection 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 . Claims 1-4, 6-12, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 Claims 5 and 13 have been canceled by Applicant Response to Amendment Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-4, 6, 9-12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2023/0205574 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hsu in view of Montero et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,067,834 B1), hereinafter referred to as Montero. With regards to Claim 1, Hsu teaches: A method for handling failures in an information handling system, the method comprising: enabling one or more crash handlers to communicate crash handler notifications to an embedded controller (EC) of the information handling system (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0037-0038: regarding the SMI handler collecting and sending the SMI to a memory accessible by the BMC), wherein the EC is configured to perform keyboard controller functions (Paragraphs 0030-0034, 0036, and 0040 and Fig. 1, errors relating to PCIe, USB, and other external devices, including keyboards; Paragraph 0047) and one or more system management functions selected from: one or more thermal management functions and one or more battery management functions (Paragraphs 0035-0036); associating one or more general purpose input/output (GPIO) pins with crash handling … to indicate a crash occurrence (Paragraph 0034: regarding the SMI signal and a designated pin); configuring the EC to perform crash operations including: registering the EC to poll status of the one or more GPIO pins (Fig. 1 and Paragraphs 0026, 0031, 0034, 0038, and 0042); detecting a crash occurrence (Paragraph 0033: regarding how the CPU chipset detects interrupts and triggers the SMM; Paragraph 0027: regarding how the CPU chipset includes the BMC) associated with either: a crash handler notification indicated by the status of the one or more GPIO pins (Paragraphs 0031 and 0034, SMI and pin; Paragraph 0039: the SMI can be triggered by “an uncorrectable error that may cause a system reboot or hang); or a system management mode (SMM) crash event (Fig. 1; Paragraphs 0031 and 0034: regarding how the SMM can be entered when the SMI is signaled to the SMI input port, that is coupled to the BMC); and extracting and storing crash context information associated with the crash occurrence (Paragraph 0038: regarding how the BMC can store and retrieve data). Hsu does not explicitly teach: and configuring at least one of the crash handlers to toggle at least one of the one or more GPIO pins However, Montero teaches: … keyboard … (Col. 6, Lines 40-67, keyboard as an I/O device and PCH) and one or more system management functions selected from: one or more thermal management functions and one or more battery management functions (Col. 7, Lines 1-39); associating one or more general purpose input/output (GPIO) pins with crash handling; and configuring at least one of the crash handlers to toggle at least one of the one or more GPIO pins to indicate a crash occurrence (Col. 3, Lines 31-46: regarding the toggling of I/O pins in response to a watchdog timer event); … indicated by the status of the one or more GPIO pins (Col 10, Lines 39-55) … Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains to toggle the GPIO pins of Hsu for additional functionality as taught by Montero (Col. 2, Lines 44-61: regarding how the toggling of I/O pins can “ensure that a defined signal level is present on the first and second I/O pins” before a reset). With regards to Claim 2, Hsu in view of Montero teaches the method of Claim 1 as referenced above. Hsu in view of Montero further teaches: wherein crash handler notifications are communicated to the EC (Hsu, Fig. 1; Paragraph 0037-0038: regarding the SMI handler collecting and sending the SMI to a memory accessible by the BMC) as MBOX commands via a peripheral interconnect (Montero, Col. 8, Lines 5-16: regarding an eSPI bus used to communicate commands with the EC in response to an error). Note: MBOX commands are being broadly interpreted as being commands relating to the communication of crash data, as disclosed in Fig. 1 and Page 12 of Applicant’s specification. With regards to Claim 3, Hsu in view of Montero teaches the method of Claim 2 as referenced above. Hsu in view of Montero further teaches: wherein the peripheral interconnect comprises an enhanced serial peripheral interconnect (eSPI) (Montero, Col. 8, Lines 5-16: regarding an eSPI bus used to communicate commands with the EC). With regards to Claim 4, Hsu in view of Montero teaches the method of Claim 1 as referenced above. Hsu in view of Montero further teaches: wherein detecting a crash occurrence associated with the SMM event includes: initiating an EC timer responsive to receiving an SMM entry message from an SMM handler; and detecting the EC timer reaching a threshold value before the EC receives an SMM exit message (Hsu, Paragraph 0044: regarding the SMI being triggered by a watchdog timer). With regards to Claim 6, Hsu in view of Montero teaches the method of Claim 1 as referenced above. Hsu in view of Montero further teaches: wherein said configuring of at least one of the crash handlers comprises configuring a basic input/output system (BIOS) crash handler (Hsu, Paragraph 0032: regarding the BIOS SMI handler; Hsu, Paragraph 0036: regarding how the BIOS can trigger the SMI) to toggle (Montero, Col. 3, Lines 31-46: regarding the toggling of I/O pins in response to a watchdog timer event) at least one of the one or more GPIO pins (Hsu, Paragraph 0034: regarding the SMI signal and a designated pin). With regards to Claim 9, Hsu in view of Montero teaches: An information handling system comprising: a central processing unit (CPU) (Hsu, Paragraph 0027: regarding the CPU); an embedded controller (EC) (Hsu, Paragraph 0026: regarding the BMC); a system memory, accessible to the CPU, including processor executable instructions that, when executed by the CPU, cause the system to perform operations including (Hsu, Paragraph 0052: regarding the instructions being stored on a memory and accessed by a processor and a controller) … Please see above the above rejection of Claim 1 for citations of the remaining limitations, as well as the motivation to combine references in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 103. All limitations of Claims 10-12 and 14 have been addressed in the analyses of Claims 2-4 and 6, respectively. Please see the above rejections for further details. Claims 7-8 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu in view of Montero, in further view of Raynham et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,774,647), hereinafter referred to as Raynham. With regards to Claim 7, Hsu in view of Montero teaches the method of Claim 1 as cited above. Hsu in view of Montero further teaches: the EC … indicative of the crash occurrence (Hsu, Paragraph 0029: regarding the BMC communicating data related to a crash with external and internal devices) Hsu in view of Montero does not explicitly teach: illuminating, by the EC, light emitting diodes (LEDs) of the EC selectively to generate an LED pattern indicative of the crash occurrence. However, Raynham teaches: illuminating, by the EC, light emitting diodes (LEDs) of the EC (Col. 3, Lines 33-36: regarding how the memory management controller connects to the LED indicators) selectively to generate an LED pattern indicative of the crash occurrence (Fig. 4; Col. 4, Lines 6-12: regarding different LED patterns being associated with different error conditions). Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains to add the feature of LED patterns indicative of a crash occurrence, as taught by Raynham, to the method of Hsu in view of Montero in order to visually indicate different errors to the user (Raynham, Col. 3, Lines 40-56 – Col. 4, Lines 1-5: regarding how different lights indicate different errors). With regards to Claim 8, Hsu in view of Montero in further view of Raynham teaches the method of Claim 7 as referenced above. Hsu in view of Montero in further view of Raynham further teaches: wherein the LED pattern is selected from a plurality of LED patterns, where each LED pattern corresponds to a particular crash event (Raynham, Fig. 4; Col. 4, Lines 6-12: regarding different LED patterns being associated with different error conditions). All limitations of Claims 15 and 16 have been addressed in the analyses of Claims 7 and 8, respectively. Please see the above rejections for further details, including the motivation to combine references in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 103. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed on January 20th, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With regards to arguments that the newly claimed features are not taught by the art, Examiner respectfully disagrees. The prior art has been cited above as teaching all of the amended features. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Dreamlayers, “How an I/O port leads to System Management Mode,” 2012: teaches the relationship between I/O ports, keyboards, and SMM IBM, “System Management Mode”: teaches various features of SMM, including its relation to I/O devices and registers Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIELLA SHELTON whose telephone number is (571)272-3117. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-3PM EST. 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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at (571) 272-3655. 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. /G.K.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2113 /BRYCE P BONZO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2113
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 31, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 20, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 02, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 20, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602275
SYSTEM-LEVEL COORDINATED RESILIENCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12585527
DIAGNOSTICS USING A DIAGNOSTIC ENGINE CORE AND DIAGNOSTIC MODULES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12572409
IDENTIFYING ANOMALOUS PORTIONS OF INPUT/OUTPUT PATHS BY MONITORING CHECKPOINTS OF INPUT/OUTPUT OPERATIONS THROUGH A STORAGE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12566664
METHOD FOR CONTROLLING FLASH MEMORY MODULE AND ASSOCIATED FLASH MEMORY CONTROLLER AND MEMORY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12554569
METHOD FOR PROCESSING WEBPAGE ACCESS EXCEPTION AND RELATED APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
62%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+16.7%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 16 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