Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/243,107

WIND POWER GENERATION QUANTILE PREDICTION METHOD BASED ON MACHINE MENTAL MODEL AND SELF-ATTENTION

Non-Final OA §101§102
Filed
Sep 07, 2023
Examiner
GUNDRY, STEPHEN T
Art Unit
2435
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
University of Science and Technology Beijing
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
540 granted / 587 resolved
+34.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
610
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
§103
41.7%
+1.7% vs TC avg
§102
7.3%
-32.7% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 587 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102
CTNF 18/243,107 CTNF 91852 DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to the application filed on 9/7/2023. Claim(s) 1-4 is/are pending and are examined. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority/Benefit Applicant’s priority claim is hereby acknowledged of CHINA 202310014898.7 01/06/2023, which papers have been placed of record in the file. Examiner’s Note Claims 3-4 overcome the prior art. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The analysis is guided by the Supreme Court's two-step framework, described in Mayo and Alice ( Alice Corp. Pty Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l , 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2354 (2014) and Mayo Collaborative Servs. V. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289, 1296-97 (2012)). Step 1: Is/Are the claim(s) directed to a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter?Answer: Yes. Step 2A Prong 1: Is/Are the claim(s) directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea, i.e., judicially recognized exceptions (both individually and as an ordered combination)? Answer: Yes, the claim 1 is directed to the mental process of “Si: constructing a basic architecture of WQPMMSA;S1: performing quantile prediction problem description and mathematical expression; S12: constructing a machine mental model as the basic architecture of WQPMMSA, and then encoding seasonal power generation rules and short-term intraday power generation trend into WQPMMSA as input information of the wind power quantile prediction method, and integrating a self-attention mechanism into WQPMMSA as a link to connect each code and vector; and S2: performing training and prediction of WQPMMSA;S21: using Continuous Ranked Probability Score (CRPS) as an evaluation index of WQPMMSA prediction results, and transforming CRPS into a derivable form by derivation; S22: using a transformed derivable CRPS as a loss function to train WQPMMSA; and S23: simulating a human psychological decision-making mechanism to predict a quantile of wind power generation by WQPMMSA using the machine mental model” beyond the scope of § 101. The claim openly identifies that it is simulation human thoughts. Dependent claims 2-4 further expand on the identified abstract idea with more detailed mathematical expressions. Step 2A Prong 2: Is/Are the claim(s) implemented into a practical application? Answer: No, the limitations of the claim as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers implementation of the mental and mathematical concepts which can be performed by the mind using pencil. It recites no other limitations. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea. Step 2B: Does/Do the claim(s) recite additional elements that when analyzed individually and in ordered combinations amount to significantly more than the judicial exception(s)? Answer: No, the claim(s) (both individually and as an ordered combinations) does/do not transform the nature of the claim(s) into a patent-eligible application of the abstract idea (i.e., significantly more than the abstract idea implemented using generic computer components). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. There are no limitations not directed to the abstract idea. Therefore, claims are not patent eligible. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151 , or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b) , in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-2, is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wang (US 2023/0169230 A1). Regarding claim 1 , Wang teaches: “ A wind power generation quantile prediction method based on machine mental model and self-attention (WQPMMSA) ( Wang, ¶ 3, 64 describes creating a wind prediction model ), comprising the following steps: Si: constructing a basic architecture of WQPMMSA ( Wang, ¶ 14-25 and 59-72 lays out the mathematical paradigm for the wind prediction mechanism with historical data and vector representation ); S1: performing quantile prediction problem description and mathematical expression ( Wang, ¶ 14-25 and 59-72 lays out the mathematical paradigm for the wind prediction mechanism with historical data and vector representation ); S12: constructing a machine mental model as the basic architecture of WQPMMSA, and then encoding seasonal power generation rules and short-term intraday power generation trend into WQPMMSA as input information of the wind power quantile prediction method, and integrating a self-attention mechanism into WQPMMSA as a link to connect each code and vector ( Wang, ¶ 58-84 teaches generating the MSF-DNQR model using quantile analysis of historical data converted into vectors ); and S2: performing training and prediction of WQPMMSA ( Wang, ¶ 73-93 teaches training and utilizing the prediction model on a test data set ); S21: using Continuous Ranked Probability Score (CRPS) as an evaluation index of WQPMMSA prediction results ( Wang, ¶ 73-93 teaches determining the loss function based on data and derivation ), and transforming CRPS into a derivable form by derivation ( Wang, ¶ 73-93 teaches determining the loss function based on data and derivation ); S22: using a transformed derivable CRPS as a loss function to train WQPMMSA ( Wang, ¶ 73-93 teaches determining the loss function and using it to train the model ); and S23: simulating a human psychological decision-making mechanism to predict a quantile of wind power generation by WQPMMSA using the machine mental model ( Wang, ¶ 73-93 teaches using the model on test sets to validate its predictive ability on wind energy creation ) ”. Regarding claim 2, Wang ¶ 26-37 and 73-84 teaches the representation of the wind information mathematically as quantiles. Conclusion In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure : See PTO-892 . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Stephen T Gundry whose telephone number is (571) 270-0507. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM (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, Amir Mehrmanesh can be reached at (571) 270-3351. 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. /STEPHEN T GUNDRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435 Application/Control Number: 18/243,107 Page 2 Art Unit: 2435 Application/Control Number: 18/243,107 Page 3 Art Unit: 2435 Application/Control Number: 18/243,107 Page 4 Art Unit: 2435 Application/Control Number: 18/243,107 Page 5 Art Unit: 2435 Application/Control Number: 18/243,107 Page 6 Art Unit: 2435 Application/Control Number: 18/243,107 Page 7 Art Unit: 2435
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 07, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596841
ANONYMIZING PERSONAL INFORMATION FOR USE IN ASSESSING FRAUD RISK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591667
Detecting and mitigating application security threats based on threat change patterns
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592825
METHODS AND SYSTEMS OF FACILITATING AUTHENTICATION FOR ACCESSING A SERVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12580943
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR NETWORK RESILIENCY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579309
ANONYMIZATION APPARATUS
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
92%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+8.5%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 587 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