Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/363,801

AUTOMATIC ACCIDENT DETECTION

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Aug 02, 2023
Examiner
WANG, JACK K
Art Unit
2686
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Anagog Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allow Rate
449 granted / 733 resolved
-0.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
753
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§103
46.5%
+6.5% vs TC avg
§102
30.8%
-9.2% vs TC avg
§112
9.6%
-30.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 733 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/1/2025 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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)(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. Claims 1, 4-7, 9-11, 13, 14, and 18-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pal et al. (Pub # US 2018/0033220 A1). Consider claim 1, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose a method comprising: obtaining readings from a mobile phone of a user, wherein the user is riding in a vehicle [0028]; determining, based on a first time window (before the accident event) of the readings obtained from the mobile phone, a mobility state of the user, wherein the mobility state is indicative of that the user is-riding in the vehicle [0035]; and determining automatically, based on a second time window (at time of accident event) of the readings obtained from the mobile phone, that the vehicle was involved in an accident, the second time window is subsequent to the first time window [0039]. Consider claim 4, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method, wherein the mobile phone comprising a sensor capable of sensing motion [0015]; wherein said determining automatically that the vehicle was involved in the accident comprises identifying a driving pattern of the vehicle that is consistent with a post-accident driving pattern [0088]. Consider claim 5, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method, wherein the mobile phone comprising a sensor capable of sensing motion; wherein said determining automatically that the vehicle was involved in the accident comprises identifying a driving pattern of the vehicle in a road segment that deviates from an average driving pattern of vehicles in the road segment [0072 and 0084]. Consider claim 6, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method, wherein the mobile phone comprising a sensor capable of sensing motion; wherein said determining automatically that the vehicle was involved in the accident comprises: identifying a second mobility state of the user, based on readings of the sensor during the second time window, indicative of the user not riding the vehicle [0094]. Consider claim 7, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method, wherein the mobile phone comprising a sensor capable of sensing motion; wherein said determining automatically that the vehicle was involved in the accident comprises: identifying a mobility pattern of the user comprising an ordinal sequence of mobility states of the user, the ordinal sequence comprising at least the mobility state and a second mobility state, the second mobility state indicative of the user (pedestrian) not riding in the vehicle, wherein the mobility pattern is indicative of the user being involved with the accident [0151 and 154]. Consider claim 9, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method, wherein the mobile phone comprising a microphone, wherein said obtaining data the readings comprises obtaining a recording of the microphone, wherein said determining automatically that the vehicle was involved in an accident comprises analyzing the recording to identify an audio segment indicative of the accident [0056]. Consider claim 10, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method, wherein the mobile phone retaining a plurality of applications, wherein said obtaining data the readings comprises obtaining a usage information of the plurality of applications, wherein said determining automatically that the vehicle was involved in the accident comprises analyzing the usage information of the plurality of applications [0077]. Consider claim 11, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method further comprises, in response to said determining automatically that the vehicle was involved in the accident, automatically reporting the accident to an emergency service [0115]. Consider claim 13, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method, wherein said determining automatically that the vehicle was involved in the accident comprises extracting a feature vector from the data readings, wherein the feature vector is associated with a sliding window with respect to a sensor of the mobile phone [0160]. Consider claim 14, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method, wherein the mobile phone comprising an accelerometer, wherein said obtaining the readings comprises obtaining accelerometer readings from the accelerometer, wherein said determining that the user is riding in the vehicle the mobility state of the user comprises analyzing the accelerometer readings of the mobile phone to determine that the user is riding in the vehicle mobility state of the user [0031]. Consider claim 18, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose a non-transitory computer readable medium retaining program instructions, which program instructions when read by a processor, cause the processor to perform [0170]: obtaining readings from a mobile phone of a user, wherein the user is riding in a vehicle; determining, based on a first time window (before accident event) of the readings obtained from the mobile phone, a mobility state of the user, wherein the mobility state is indicative of that the user is-riding in the vehicle [0035]; and determining automatically, based on a second time window (at time of accident event) of the readings obtained from the mobile phone, that the vehicle was involved in an accident, the second time window is subsequent to the first time window [0039]. Consider claim 19, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose an apparatus comprising: a processor and a memory, wherein the memory retaining said non-transitory computer readable medium of Claim 18 [0170]. Consider claim 20, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method further comprises, in response to said determining automatically that the vehicle was involved in the accident, automatically reporting the accident to an emergency service and to a family member [0115 and 0119]. Consider claim 21, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the method further comprises, in response to said determining automatically that the vehicle was involved in the accident, automatically reporting a location of the accident to an emergency service [0126]. Consider claim 22, the apparatus system herein has been performed or executed by the corresponding method steps as shown in claim 1. Therefore, claim 22 has been analyzed and rejected with regard to claim as set forth above. Consider claim 23, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the system, wherein said processor is configured to automatically report that the vehicle was involved in an accident to an emergency service in response to the automatic determination that the vehicle was involved in the accident [0115]. Consider claim 24, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the system, wherein said system is configured to automatically report a location of the accident to the emergency service [0126]. Consider claim 25, Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the system, wherein said mobile phone is configured to report that the vehicle was involved in an the accident to a family member of the user, wherein the report is provided in response to the automatic determination that the vehicle was involved in the accident [0115 and 0119]. Consider claim 26 Pal et al. clearly shows and disclose the system, wherein the system is configured to automatically report that the vehicle was involved in the accident in response to the automatic determination, wherein the report is provided to at least an emergency service and a contact of the user, wherein the contact of the user is retained in the mobile phone [0116]. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK K WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1938. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Curtis Kuntz can be reached at 571-272-7499. 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. /JACK K WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2687
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 02, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 10, 2025
Response Filed
May 31, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Aug 01, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12548418
SENSOR POWERED BY ITEM OF MERCHANDISE FOR RETAIL SECURITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12518125
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR A RFID ENABLED METAL LICENSE PLATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12515679
Apparatuses, Systems and Methods for Determining Distracted Drivers Associated With Vehicle Driving Routes
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12508187
HAPTIC GUIDING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12499768
METHODS AND APPARATUS TO VALIDATE DATA COMMUNICATED BY A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
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
61%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+12.7%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 733 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