Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/306,796

APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING VEHICLE, METHOD FOR CONTROLLING VEHICLE AND CONTROL PROGRAM THEREOF

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 25, 2023
Examiner
CAMERON, ATTICUS A
Art Unit
3658
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
J-QuAD DYNAMICS Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
49 granted / 58 resolved
+32.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
58 currently pending
Career history
116
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
13.6%
-26.4% vs TC avg
§103
48.0%
+8.0% vs TC avg
§102
30.8%
-9.2% vs TC avg
§112
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 58 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. Joint Inventors This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/04/2025 has been entered. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/19/2025 and 12/11/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). A certified copy of this document has been placed in the file wrapper. As such, the effective filing date of the instant application is considered 04/27/2022, coinciding with the filing date of the Japan application to which foreign priority was requested. Response to Amendment Claims 1 and 11-12 have been amended. No claims have been added or cancelled. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner finds Applicants arguments regarding the recently amended language moot with consideration to the withdrawal of the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection, and presentation of an updated 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection below. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim 1-8 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (US9940529, referred to as Maeda) in view of Kin et al. (JP2012162122A, referred to as Kin). Regarding claim 1: Maeda discloses: A vehicle control apparatus comprising: a reliability determination unit that determines a location reliability of an own vehicle, the location reliability comprising a reliability that indicates whether a current location of the own vehicle is in a parking place, wherein the parking place is a parking lot comprised of partitioned parking spaces, the location reliability being determined using a detection result of a parking space among the partitioned parking spaces or a parked vehicle around the own vehicle based on image data around the own vehicle captured by a camera; and ([col. 1, lines 48-58] The parking space recognition apparatus includes an onboard camera mounted to a first vehicle and capturing a peripheral image around the first vehicle; a wireless receiver also mounted to the first vehicle and receiving a parking-space related information that is transmitted from an outside of the first vehicle; and a parking space determination portion also mounted to the first vehicle and determining a parking space to park the first vehicle on a basis of the peripheral image captured by the onboard camera and the parking-space related information received by the wireless receiver. [col. 11, lines 24-31] At S60, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited using the reliability after correction. Specifically, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited to parking compartment line candidates and endpoint candidates having equal to or more than a predetermined values that are set to the first compartment line reliability and the endpoint reliability after the corrections. [col. 11, lines 32-44] At S70, tracking is performed. The tracking continuously recognizes the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates, which are limited at S60 during travel of the first vehicle Cl. When the first vehicle Cl travels, the relative positions of the parking compartment line candidates, the endpoint candidates limited at S60, and the first vehicle Cl change. According to the positions of the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates limited at S60 and a travel amount of the first vehicle Cl, a analysis area in the peripheral image are determined. The analysis area is analyzed, and the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates limited at S60 is continuously recognized. [col. 12, lines 1-7] At S 110, a second update process is performed to update the parking-space related information on the basis of the information other than the parking-space related information received from the outside. FIG. 10 illustrates the second update process. In FIG. 10, the parking lot map is updated at S 111 on the basis of the parking compartment lines determined at S 100.) an own vehicle location determination unit that determines whether the own vehicle location is in the parking place, using a determination result of the location reliability determined by the reliability determination unit ([col. 11, lines 24-31] At S60, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited using the reliability after correction. Specifically, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited to parking compartment line candidates and endpoint candidates having equal to or more than a predetermined values that are set to the first compartment line reliability and the endpoint reliability after the corrections. [col. 12, lines 1-7] At S 110, a second update process is performed to update the parking-space related information on the basis of the information other than the parking-space related information received from the outside. FIG. 10 illustrates the second update process. In FIG. 10, the parking lot map is updated at S 111 on the basis of the parking compartment lines determined at S 100.) [wherein when the own vehicle location determination unit determines that the own vehicle location is in the parking place, a travelling mode of the own vehicle is set to be a parking space mode that limits acceleration of the own vehicle in the parking place.] Maeda does not explicitly disclose: wherein when the own vehicle location determination unit determines that the own vehicle location is in the parking place, a travelling mode of the own vehicle is set to be a parking space mode that limits acceleration of the own vehicle in the parking place. Maeda does not disclose the following limitations, however Kin, from an analogous field of endeavor, further teaches: ([0013] when the light projecting means transmits a signal indicating that it is an acceleration suppression region that suppresses acceleration of the vehicle by light, the light receiving means mounted on the vehicle is the light projecting means outside the vehicle. When the determination means determines whether the vehicle is in the acceleration suppression area based on the signal received by the light reception means, and when the vehicle is determined to be in the acceleration suppression area, Since the traveling control means performs traveling control that suppresses acceleration of the host vehicle, it is possible to reliably prevent sudden acceleration of the vehicle only in a limited area such as the vicinity of a parking space where it is necessary to prevent sudden acceleration of the vehicle This makes it possible to avoid excessive sudden acceleration suppression control.) Maeda and Kin are analogous art to the claimed invention since they are from the similar field of parking assistance vehicle control. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to modify the parking reliability determination unit of Maeda to enable the parking acceleration limiting taught in Kin. The motivation for modification would have been to provide the parking recognition method disclosed in Maeda with the added benefit of preventing collision by limiting acceleration during the parking scenario, as taught in Kin. Regarding claim 2: The combination of Maeda and Kin teaches: The vehicle control apparatus according to claim 1, Maeda further discloses: wherein the reliability determination unit determines the location reliability using a relative location of the detected parked vehicle or the parking space relative to the own vehicle. ([col. 1, lines 48-58] The parking space recognition apparatus includes an onboard camera mounted to a first vehicle and capturing a peripheral image around the first vehicle; a wireless receiver also mounted to the first vehicle and receiving a parking-space related information that is transmitted from an outside of the first vehicle; and a parking space determination portion also mounted to the first vehicle and determining a parking space to park the first vehicle on a basis of the peripheral image captured by the onboard camera and the parking-space related information received by the wireless receiver. [col. 11, lines 32-44] At S70, tracking is performed. The tracking continuously recognizes the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates, which are limited at S60 during travel of the first vehicle Cl. When the first vehicle Cl travels, the relative positions of the parking compartment line candidates, the endpoint candidates limited at S60, and the first vehicle Cl change. According to the positions of the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates limited at S60 and a travel amount of the first vehicle Cl, a analysis area in the peripheral image are determined. The analysis area is analyzed, and the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates limited at S60 is continuously recognized. [col. 10, lines 37-41] As the position of the parking-compartment-entrance facing end of the parked vehicle is closer to the position of the parking-compartment-entrance facing end of the target compartment line candidate, the first compartment line reliability is made lower.) Regarding claim 3: The combination of Maeda and Kin teaches: The vehicle control apparatus according to claim 1, Maeda further discloses: wherein the own vehicle location determination unit, when determining as an affirmative determination that the own vehicle location is in the parking place, maintains the affirmative determination even if the location reliability decreases while a predetermined affirmative determination maintaining condition is being satisfied. ([col. 11, lines 18-31] when the parking-compartment-entrance facing end of the parked vehicle is placed at the parking-compartment-entrance facing end of the target compartment line candidate toward the rear side of the parking compartment, a degree of decrease of the endpoint reliability may be made small or the decrease amount may be made zero. At S60, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited using the reliability after correction. Specifically, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited to parking compartment line candidates and endpoint candidates having equal to or more than a predetermined values that are set to the first compartment line reliability and the endpoint reliability after the corrections. [col. 12, lines 37-46] a parking compartment, which is a parking space, is determined using the parking-space related information received by the wireless receiver 12, in addition to the peripheral images captured by the front camera 7 and the rear camera 8. Therefore, it may be possible that the recognition accuracy of a parking compartment improves in comparison to when the parking compartment is determined only using the peripheral image captured by the front camera 7 and the rear camera 8.) Regarding claim 4: The combination of Maeda and Kin teaches: The vehicle control apparatus according to claim 3, Maeda further discloses: wherein the predetermined affirmative determination maintaining condition is a travel distance or an elapsed time. ([col. 11, lines 1-9] The endpoint reliability is also corrected similarly. That is, the endpoint reliability is made lower as a position of the parking-compartment-entrance facing end of the parked vehicle is closer to the path to enter the parking compartment. In the direction of the parking compartment line having the endpoint candidate as an end, the endpoint reliability is made lower as the position of the parking compartment-entrance facing end of the parked vehicle is closer to the path to enter the parking compartment. [col. 11, lines 18-31] when the parking-compartment-entrance facing end of the parked vehicle is placed at the parking-compartment-entrance facing end of the target compartment line candidate toward the rear side of the parking compartment, a degree of decrease of the endpoint reliability may be made small or the decrease amount may be made zero. At S60, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited using the reliability after correction. Specifically, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited to parking compartment line candidates and endpoint candidates having equal to or more than a predetermined values that are set to the first compartment line reliability and the endpoint reliability after the corrections. ) Regarding claim 5: The combination of Maeda and Kin teaches: The vehicle control apparatus according to claim 3, Maeda further discloses: wherein the own vehicle location determination unit, when determining as the affirmative determination and a shift position is in a reverse position, maintains the affirmative determination. ([col. 11, lines 18-31] when the parking-compartment-entrance facing end of the parked vehicle is placed at the parking-compartment-entrance facing end of the target compartment line candidate toward the rear side of the parking compartment, a degree of decrease of the endpoint reliability may be made small or the decrease amount may be made zero. At S60, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited using the reliability after correction. Specifically, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited to parking compartment line candidates and endpoint candidates having equal to or more than a predetermined values that are set to the first compartment line reliability and the endpoint reliability after the corrections. [col. 12, lines 37-46] a parking compartment, which is a parking space, is determined using the parking-space related information received by the wireless receiver 12, in addition to the peripheral images captured by the front camera 7 and the rear camera 8. Therefore, it may be possible that the recognition accuracy of a parking compartment improves in comparison to when the parking compartment is determined only using the peripheral image captured by the front camera 7 and the rear camera 8.) Regarding claim 6: The combination of Maeda and Kin teaches: The vehicle control apparatus according to claim 3, Maeda further discloses: wherein the own vehicle location determination unit maintains the affirmative determination even when an ignition operation is performed during the affirmative determination. ([col. 13, lines 1-15] The travel start detector 23 transmits the travel start information regardless of whether the vehicle starts traveling in a parking lot. Then, when the in-parking information is received, when a position indicated in the in-parking information is on a road, and when the travel start information including the same position as the position indicated in the in-parking information is received, a parking time may be calculated. It may be determined whether a vehicle that has transmitted the in-parking information and the travel start information has been parked or stopped on the basis of the parking time. When the vehicle has been parked, a position where the vehicle has been parked may be determined as a parking space. [col. 12, lines 37-46] a parking compartment, which is a parking space, is determined using the parking-space related information received by the wireless receiver 12, in addition to the peripheral images captured by the front camera 7 and the rear camera 8. Therefore, it may be possible that the recognition accuracy of a parking compartment improves in comparison to when the parking compartment is determined only using the peripheral image captured by the front camera 7 and the rear camera 8.) Regarding claim 7: The combination of Maeda and Kin teaches: The vehicle control apparatus according to claim 1, Maeda further discloses: wherein the own vehicle location determination unit, when determining as a negative determination that the own vehicle location is not in the parking place, maintains the negative determination even if the location reliability increases while a predetermined negative determination maintaining condition is being satisfied. ([col. 14, lines 24-27] When the travel start information is received, the parking availability information about a parking compartment indicated in the travel start information indicates that parking is available. [col. 12, lines 37-46] a parking compartment, which is a parking space, is determined using the parking-space related information received by the wireless receiver 12, in addition to the peripheral images captured by the front camera 7 and the rear camera 8. Therefore, it may be possible that the recognition accuracy of a parking compartment improves in comparison to when the parking compartment is determined only using the peripheral image captured by the front camera 7 and the rear camera 8.) Regarding claim 8: The combination of Maeda and Kin teaches: The vehicle control apparatus according to claim 7, Maeda further discloses: wherein the reliability determination unit determines the location reliability with a multi-stage level of three or more levels; ([Fig. 3] level 1: S20, S30 S40, S50, [Fig. 5] level 2: S44 level 3: S45) and the predetermined negative determination maintaining condition is a condition in which the location reliability is less than or equal to a predetermined level.([col. 11, lines 24-31] At S60, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited using the reliability after correction. Specifically, the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates are limited to parking compartment line candidates and endpoint candidates having equal to or more than a predetermined values that are set to the first compartment line reliability and the endpoint reliability after the corrections.) Regarding claim 11: Rejected using the same rationale as claim 1. Regarding claim 12: Rejected using the same rationale as claims 1 and 11. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (US9940529, referred to as Maeda) in view of Kin et al. (JP2012162122A, referred to as Kin), and further in view of Li et al. (CN113428135A, referred to as Li). Regarding claim 9: The combination of Maeda and Kin teaches: The vehicle control apparatus according to claim 1, Maeda further discloses: wherein the own vehicle location determination unit determines that the own vehicle location is not in the parking place when the own vehicle approaches a vertical-parking space. ([col. 1, lines 48-58] The parking space recognition apparatus includes an onboard camera mounted to a first vehicle and capturing a peripheral image around the first vehicle; a wireless receiver also mounted to the first vehicle and receiving a parking-space related information that is transmitted from an outside of the first vehicle; and a parking space determination portion also mounted to the first vehicle and determining a parking space to park the first vehicle on a basis of the peripheral image captured by the onboard camera and the parking-space related information received by the wireless receiver. [col. 11, lines 32-44] At S70, tracking is performed. The tracking continuously recognizes the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates, which are limited at S60 during travel of the first vehicle Cl. When the first vehicle Cl travels, the relative positions of the parking compartment line candidates, the endpoint candidates limited at S60, and the first vehicle Cl change. According to the positions of the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates limited at S60 and a travel amount of the first vehicle Cl, a analysis area in the peripheral image are determined. The analysis area is analyzed, and the parking compartment line candidates and the endpoint candidates limited at S60 is continuously recognized. The combination of Maeda and Kin does not explicitly teach: [vertical] The combination of Maeda and Kin does not teach the following limitations, however, Li, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches: vertical ([pg. 2] The parking map generating module is used to generate a parking map of the target vehicle based on the target coordinate system in response to a parking instruction based on the target vertical parking space; The position acquisition module is configured to acquire the initial position of the target vehicle and the position of the target vertical parking space based on the parking map. The position of the target vertical parking space includes the longitudinal centerline position and the horizontal position of the target vertical parking space. The position of the front line and the position of the horizontal back line; A lateral adjustment trajectory module, configured to control the target vehicle to advance from the initial position to a first end position corresponding to the lateral adjustment trajectory of the target vehicle based on the minimum turning radius of the target vehicle and a tracking control algorithm; A straight-line transition trajectory module, configured to control the target vehicle to retreat laterally to a second end position corresponding to the straight-line transition trajectory of the target vehicle based on the longitudinal centerline position and the minimum turning radius; An arc transition trajectory module, configured to control the target vehicle to retreat at the maximum steering wheel angle to the third end position corresponding to the arc transition trajectory of the target vehicle based on the longitudinal centerline position and the lateral front line position; The longitudinal warehousing trajectory module is used to control the target vehicle to retreat to the parking point position corresponding to the longitudinal warehousing trajectory of the target vehicle based on the lateral rear edge position and the tracking control algorithm. ) Maeda, Kin, and Li are analogous art to the claimed invention since they are from the similar field of parking assistance vehicle control. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to modify the parking reliability determination unit of Maeda to enable the vertical parking taught in Li. The motivation for modification would have been to provide the parking recognition method taught in the combination of Maeda and Kin with the method applied to vertical-parking situations, as taught in Li. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (US9940529, referred to as Maeda) in view of Kin et al. (JP2012162122A, referred to as Kin), and further in view of Inoue et al. (US9738288, referred to as Inoue). Regarding claim 10: The combination of Maeda and Kin teaches: The vehicle control apparatus according to claim 1, Maeda further discloses: [wherein an acceleration suppression control is provided to suppress an acceleration of the own vehicle caused by an erroneous acceleration-pedal pressing; and] when the own vehicle location is in the parking place, [a mode of the acceleration suppression control is changed], depending on a distance between the own vehicle and the parking space or a converted time value where a value of the distance is converted to a time value. ([col. 13, lines 1-15] The travel start detector 23 transmits the travel start information regardless of whether the vehicle starts traveling in a parking lot. Then, when the in-parking information is received, when a position indicated in the in-parking information is on a road, and when the travel start information including the same position as the position indicated in the in-parking information is received, a parking time may be calculated. It may be determined whether a vehicle that has transmitted the in-parking information and the travel start information has been parked or stopped on the basis of the parking time. When the vehicle has been parked, a position where the vehicle has been parked may be determined as a parking space. [col. 12, lines 37-46] a parking compartment, which is a parking space, is determined using the parking-space related information received by the wireless receiver 12, in addition to the peripheral images captured by the front camera 7 and the rear camera 8. Therefore, it may be possible that the recognition accuracy of a parking compartment improves in comparison to when the parking compartment is determined only using the peripheral image captured by the front camera 7 and the rear camera 8.) The combination of Maeda and Kin does not explicitly teach: [wherein an acceleration suppression control is provided to suppress an acceleration of the own vehicle caused by an erroneous acceleration-pedal pressing; and]; [a mode of the acceleration suppression control is changed], The combination of Maeda and Kin does not teach the following limitations, however, Inoue, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches: wherein an acceleration suppression control is provided to suppress an acceleration of the own vehicle caused by an erroneous acceleration-pedal pressing; and ([Fig. 6] START ERRONEOUS OPERATION ACCELERATION SUPPRESSION CONTROL PROCESS); a mode of the acceleration suppression control is changed, ([col. 12, lines 38-53] At step S112, by referring to a table of FIG. 10, a target deceleration Ax* is set in accordance with an obstacle certainty level. FIG. 10 is a table for use in setting a target deceleration Ax*. Herein, when the obstacle certainty level is "no detection" since no braking operation is necessary, the target deceleration Ax* is set to 0. When the obstacle certainty level is "low", the target deceleration Ax* is set to 0.25 G so as to automatically apply braking. When the obstacle certainty level is "high", the target deceleration Ax* is set to 0.5 G so as to automatically apply braking. At step S113, the throttle motor 35 is controlled to be driven via the engine controller 38, thereby effectuating the target throttle opening degree SPO*, and the brake actuator 51 is controlled to be driven via the brake controller 54, thereby effectuating the target deceleration Ax*.) Maeda, Kin, and Inoue are analogous art to the claimed invention since they are from the similar field of parking assistance vehicle control. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to modify the parking system of Maeda and Kin to enable the acceleration suppression modes of Inoue. The motivation for modification would have been to provide the parking recognition method taught in the combination of Maeda and Kin with the method applied to acceleration suppressing control for erroneous acceleration-pedal pressing, as taught in Inoue. Conclusion The prior art made of record, and not relied upon, considered pertinent to applicant' s disclosure or directed to the state of art is listed on the enclosed PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ATTICUS A CAMERON whose telephone number is 703-756-4535. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 4:30 pm. 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 Worden can be reached on 571-272-4876. 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. /ATTICUS A CAMERON/ /JASON HOLLOWAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658 Examiner, Art Unit 3658A
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 25, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 25, 2025
Interview Requested
May 07, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 07, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 02, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 28, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 04, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 09, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583445
VEHICLE CONTROLLER, METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR VEHICLE CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586473
SYSTEM AND METHOD TO BUILD A FLYABLE HOLDING PATTERN ENTRY TRAJECTORY WHEN THE AVAILABLE SPACE IS LIMITED
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12544937
ROBOTIC HAND SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING ROBOTIC HAND
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12528448
HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLE ENERGY MANAGEMENT DURING EXTREME OPERATING CONDITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12521883
SAFETY SYSTEM FOR INTEGRATED HUMAN/ROBOTIC ENVIRONMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 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
84%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+11.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 58 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