Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/406,348

CONTROLLING AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES BASED ON EDGE SERVERS' RESOURCES

Final Rejection §101§102§103
Filed
Jan 08, 2024
Examiner
PETTIEGREW, TOYA R
Art Unit
3662
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
International Business Machines Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
96 granted / 156 resolved
+9.5% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
194
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
§103
63.1%
+23.1% vs TC avg
§102
3.9%
-36.1% vs TC avg
§112
9.2%
-30.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 156 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §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 . Response to Arguments Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101: Applicant's arguments filed 11/26/2025 have been fully considered and are not persuasive regarding claims 8-14. Independent claim 8 as recited does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because computer-readable medium is considered computer readable transmission media defined as signal per se and is not within one of the four statutory categories. It appears from applicant’s disclosure that the claim could be amended to fall within a statutory category and would qualify as eligible (e.g. non-transitory computer readable storage medium) as defined in applicant’s disclosure [0103]). Additionally, independent claim 8 and dependent claims 9 and 11-12 recite program code which is considered computer program per se (often referred to as "software per se") when claimed as a product without any structural recitations and is also not within one of the four statutory categories of patent eligible subject matter. Thus, the rejection is maintained. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102: Applicant’s arguments, filed 11/26/2025, with respect to 1-5, 8-12 and 15-19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection has been withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103: Applicant’s arguments, filed 11/26/2025, with respect to 6-7, 13-14 and 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection has been withdrawn. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/03/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Office Action on 8/27/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 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. Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 8 as recited does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because computer-readable medium is considered computer readable transmission media defined as signal per se and is not within one of the four statutory categories. Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes. Claim 8 does not recite subject matter that falls within one of the following groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes. Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. It appears from applicant’s disclosure that the claim could be amended to fall within a statutory category and would qualify as eligible (e.g. non-transitory computer readable storage medium) as defined in applicant’s disclosure [0103]). Dependent claims 9-14 are rejected based on dependence on independent claim 8. Additionally, independent claim 8 and dependent claims 9 and 11-12 recite program code which is considered computer program per se (often referred to as "software per se") when claimed as a product without any structural recitations and is also not within one of the four statutory categories of patent eligible subject matter. Thus claims 8-14 are ineligible. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-7 and 15-20 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Independent claims 1 and 15 are allowable over the prior art of record for their specific recitations of elements involving a system and method for controlling autonomous vehicles based on edge servers’ resources, i.e. obtaining a load of neighboring edge servers; determining if there is a load reduction plan to be applied to one or more of said autonomous vehicles in response to said estimated load of said edge server exceeding a threshold value; and instructing said one or more of said autonomous vehicles to reroute to a coverage area under a control of a neighboring edge server with capacity for handling an additional workload in response to not applying said load reduction plan; among other limitations. Additionally, the prior art of record of Zhou et al. (20200310413 A1; hereafter Zhou) does not explicitly teach the claimed invention as recited in independent claims 1 and 15; for example, controlling autonomous vehicles based on edge servers’ resources by determining if there is a load reduction plan to be applied to one or more of said autonomous vehicles in response to said estimated load of said edge server exceeding a threshold value; and instructing said one or more of said autonomous vehicles to reroute to a coverage area under a control of a neighboring edge server with capacity for handling an additional workload in response to not applying said load reduction plan. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOYA PETTIEGREW whose telephone number is (313)446-6636. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30pm - 5:00pm M-F. 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, Jelani Smith can be reached at 571-270-3969. 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. /TOYA PETTIEGREW/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 08, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102, §103
Nov 26, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 09, 2026
Final Rejection — §101, §102, §103
Apr 07, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600349
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ASSISTING FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE BASED ON DRIVING ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594934
EQUIDISTANT-TEMPORAL AGGREGATION FOR MOVING OBJECT SEGMENTATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589773
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SENSOR CALIBRATION AT AN ENERGY SUPPLY STATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576890
YIELDING SYSTEM FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES AND CONTROL METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570323
CROSSWALK HANDLING FOR VEHICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
62%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+18.5%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 156 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month