Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/345,125

SUBCIRCUIT INTELLIGENT ORCHESTRATION WITH MULTIPLE CRITERIA

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 30, 2023
Examiner
WAI, ERIC CHARLES
Art Unit
2195
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
DELL PRODUCTS, L.P.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
529 granted / 644 resolved
+27.1% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
671
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
15.7%
-24.3% vs TC avg
§103
50.0%
+10.0% vs TC avg
§102
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
§112
14.4%
-25.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 644 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-20 are presented for examination. 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 § 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. Claim(s) 1-4, 6-14 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Durazzo et al. (US PG Pub No. 2021/0406151 A1) in view of Dhand et al. (US PG Pub No. 2022/0391571 A1). Regarding claim 1, Durazzo teaches a method comprising: obtaining telemetry data from resources available for executing a quantum job ([0010]; Fig 308, “Check Resource Availability”; [0047]); performing a runtime prediction for each of the quantum generating an execution plan by optimizing use of the resources based on the telemetry data and the runtime characteristics (Fig 2, 306, “Generate Recommendation”; [0046]); and executing each of the quantum Durazzo does not teach performing a cutting operation to cut a quantum circuit included in the quantum job into quantum subcircuits; and performing a runtime prediction and executing each of the quantum subcircuits. Dhand teaches dividing or slicing quantum circuits into subcircuits for execution ([0034]; [0090]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to perform a cutting operation to cut a quantum circuit into quantum subcircuits; and performing a runtime prediction and executing each of the quantum subcircuits. One would be motivated by the desire to allow for parallel computation of the quantum circuit as taught by Dhand ([0035]). Regarding claim 2, Durazzo teaches further comprising determining whether to proceed with cutting the quantum subcircuits based on criteria associated with executing the quantum circuit and performing the runtime prediction on the quantum circuit to generate corresponding runtime characteristics for the quantum circuit ([0046]). Regarding claim 3, Durazzo teaches wherein the criteria include determining whether sufficient resources to execute the quantum circuit within boundaries of associated service level objectives are available and whether performing the cutting operation improves an overall performance of orchestrating execution of the quantum circuit ([0041]). Regarding claim 4, Durazzo teaches wherein the runtime prediction is configured to predict an amount of resources and an execution time for executing each of the quantum subcircuits ([0010]; Fig 2, 304, “Estimate Runtime Statistics”; [0034]). Regarding claim 6, Dhand further comprising deploying the quantum subcircuits to a quantum system for sequential execution of the quantum subcircuits or to multiple quantum systems for at least partially parallel execution of the quantum subcircuits ([0057]). Regarding claim 7, Durazzo teaches further comprising accounting for service level objectives associated with the quantum job ([0027]). Regarding claim 8, Durazzo teaches wherein the service level objectives include time, budget, and/or accuracy ([0027]). Regarding claim 9, Durazzo teaches wherein the resources include classical computing resources, simulated quantum computing resources, and/or quantum computing resources ([0047]; [0027]). Regarding claim 10, Durazzo teaches further comprising: generating the execution plan based on current telemetry data, the runtime characteristics, and service level objectives associated with the quantum circuit (Fig 2, 306, “Generate Recommendation”; [0046]; [0027]); knitting outputs generated by executing the quantum subcircuits; and providing an output of the quantum circuit to a hybrid application ([0031]). Regarding claims 11-14 and 16-20, they are the medium claims of claims 1-4 and 6-10 above. Therefore, they are rejected for the same reasons as claims 1-4 and 6-10 above. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC C WAI whose telephone number is (571)270-1012. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-5. 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, Aimee Li can be reached at (571) 272-4169. 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. /Eric C Wai/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2195
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 30, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602261
CONTAINER SCHEDULING ACCORDING TO PREEMPTING A SET OF PREEMPTABLE CONTAINERS DEPLOYED IN A CLUSTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602248
METHOD AND DEVICE OF LAUNCHING AN APPLICATION IN BACKGROUND
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12585498
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN DYNAMIC SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585503
UNIFIED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ARCHITECTURE FOR WORKLOAD SCHEDULERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579001
REINFORCEMENT LEARNING SPACE STATE PRUNING USING RESTRICTED BOLTZMANN MACHINES
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
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.2%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 644 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