Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/248,834

ROBOT WATCHDOG

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 12, 2023
Examiner
YANCHUS III, PAUL B
Art Unit
2115
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
The Johns Hopkins University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
685 granted / 827 resolved
+27.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
856
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.3%
-32.7% vs TC avg
§103
51.5%
+11.5% vs TC avg
§102
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
§112
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 827 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 – (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. Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9, 11-13, 16, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Duchemin et al., “Medically Safe and Sound” [Duchemin]1. Regarding claims 1, 9 and 16, Duchemin discloses a system for providing robotic control comprising: a hardware watchdog configured to provide control over a robot manipulator [dedicated watchdog boards implemented in hardware control power provided to the robot manipulator based on presence of a binary pulse signal generated by software and hardware thresholds are built into F/T sensors to limit force applied by a robot to a patient, pages 48, 49, 51 and 53]; and a software watchdog configured to run on a processing device and programmed to provide thread-safe architecture control over real-time and non-real-time processes of the hardware watchdog and the robot manipulator [real-time and non-real-time software processes are executed on a controller to control and detect errors in operation of robot hardware components and the software processes are checked by a dedicated watchdog process, pages 50, 51 and 53]. Regarding claims 2, 4, 5, 11, 12 and 20, Duchemin further discloses a system of emergency switches that are placed at locations throughout the robot manipulator and are configured to facilitate immediate operator access for safety [emergency buttons are provided at accessible locations such as a control desk and a controller front panel of the robot, pages 49 and 53]. Regarding claims 6, 13 and 17, Duchemin further discloses a redundancy system configured to prevent safety failures [redundant sensors and watchdog board circuits, pages 49 and 53]. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 3, 7, 8, 10, 14, 15, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duchemin et al., “Medically Safe and Sound” [Duchemin]. Regarding claims 3 and 10, Duchemin, as described above, discloses a system of emergency switches, but does not disclose that the emergency switched are momentary single pole switches. Examiner takes official notice that momentary single pole switches were conventionally used to implement emergency switches before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to use momentary single pole switches as the emergency switches in Duchemin. Regarding claims 7, 8, 14, 15, 18 and 19, Duchemin further discloses electronics configured to facilitate latch, relay and visual status [Latching and Relay Circuit and HMI, Figure 3 on page 50]. Duchemin further discloses performing a fail-down check on a pulse train received from software [Input Signal Stuck at a Low Level, Figure 3 on page 50]. Examiner takes official notice that detecting pulse train errors was conventionally performed by both fail-up and fail-down checks before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in order to accurately detect pulse train errors to account for errors caused by the pulse signal being stuck at either a logic high level or errors caused by the pulse signal being stuck at a logic low level. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform both conventional fail-up and conventional fail-down checks on the pulse signal train received from software in Duchemin in order to more accurately detect pulse signal train errors. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. O’Neill et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2015/0032293 discloses an e-stop controller for a robotic system that includes a hardware failsafe and a software failsafe. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL B YANCHUS III whose telephone number is (571)272-3678. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-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, Thomas Lee can be reached at (571) 272-3667. 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. /PAUL B YANCHUS III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115 December 13, 2025 1 Duchemin was cited in the 4/12/23 IDS.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 12, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602024
PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION BASED ON GEOLOCATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12578154
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR EVALUATING HEAT EXCHANGERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12566010
COMMUNICATION CONTROL METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR AIR CONDITIONER, AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12566425
METHOD FOR TEMPORARILY CLOSING OPENINGS IN AIRCRAFT PARTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12566812
WEB PAGE DISPLAY METHOD, APPARATUS, AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
83%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+14.2%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 827 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