Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/485,824

SELF DRAWING TOOL FOR A COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED AUTOMATED DESIGN, MODELING AND MANUFACTURING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Oct 12, 2023
Examiner
JARRETT, RYAN A
Art Unit
2116
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Mechanical Software Technologies Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
695 granted / 861 resolved
+25.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
881
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.2%
-31.8% vs TC avg
§103
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
§102
34.3%
-5.7% vs TC avg
§112
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 861 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. 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 pre-AIA 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 – (e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language. Claims 21-26 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Reghetti et al. US 2010/0223032 (“Reghetti”). Reghetti discloses: 21. A computer-implemented automated design, modeling and manufacturing system comprising: a processor (e.g., [0223]); and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions which, when executed by the processor (e.g., [0223]), cause the system to: flag one or more conflicts between a plurality of elements of a schematic drawing of a project and one or more of structural, architectural and trade elements based on routing information of the plurality of elements (e.g., [0153]-[0156]: “each alert (conflict) bubble could then be assigned to a specific trade and colored”); generate, at an output device, a plurality of selectable options for resolving the one or more conflicts (e.g., Fig. 17 #338, [0161]: “As illustrated in Fig. 17, Alert Control dialog box 336 includes an Alert Resolution Proposal Manager 338”, “the Alert Control dialog box 336 includes a Targeting tab 340 that opens a targeting screen 360, illustrated in Fig. 19, that offers several thorough solutions to the conflict”); resolve the one or more conflicts based on a selection, via the output device, of one of the plurality of selectable options to provide one or more resolved conflicts (e.g., [0161]-[0165]: “that allows the user to test different possible resolutions of the conflict by moving different objects”); and generate a co-ordination drawing of the project, the coordination drawing providing routing information of the plurality of elements based on the one or more resolved conflicts (e.g., [0161]: “making any permanent changes to the drawing”, [0165]-[0166]: “The process of trying different resolutions and identifying new potential conflicts would continue unit a set of proposed resolutions could be define that would clear all of the conflicts without creating new ones that could not be resolved.”). 22. The computer-implemented automated design, modeling and manufacturing system of claim 21, wherein to resolve the one or more conflicts includes to redirect at least one of the plurality of elements to avoid the one or more conflicts (e.g., [0161]-[0165]: “that allows the user to test different possible resolutions of the conflict by moving different objects”, “the HVAC duct 308 and pipe 310 are moved down in order to avoid the conflict with beam 302”). 23. A computer-implemented method for generating a co-ordination drawing of a project, the method comprising: flagging one or more conflicts between a plurality of elements of a schematic drawing of the project and one or more of structural, architectural and trade elements based on routing information of the plurality of elements (e.g., [0153]-[0156]: “each alert (conflict) bubble could then be assigned to a specific trade and colored”); generating, at an output device, a plurality of selectable options for resolving the one or more conflicts (e.g., Fig. 17 #338, [0161]: “As illustrated in Fig. 17, Alert Control dialog box 336 includes an Alert Resolution Proposal Manager 338”, “the Alert Control dialog box 336 includes a Targeting tab 340 that opens a targeting screen 360, illustrated in Fig. 19, that offers several thorough solutions to the conflict”); resolving the one or more conflicts based on a selection, via the output device, of one of the plurality of selectable options to provide one or more resolved conflicts (e.g., [0161]-[0165]: “that allows the user to test different possible resolutions of the conflict by moving different objects”); and generating a co-ordination drawing of the project, the coordination drawing providing routing information of the plurality of elements based on the one or more resolved conflicts (e.g., [0161]: “making any permanent changes to the drawing”, [0165]-[0166]: “The process of trying different resolutions and identifying new potential conflicts would continue unit a set of proposed resolutions could be define that would clear all of the conflicts without creating new ones that could not be resolved.”). 24. The computer-implemented method of claim 23 wherein resolving the one or more conflicts includes redirecting at least one of the plurality of elements to avoid the one or more conflicts (e.g., [0161]-[0165]: “that allows the user to test different possible resolutions of the conflict by moving different objects”, “the HVAC duct 308 and pipe 310 are moved down in order to avoid the conflict with beam 302”). 25. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions that, when executed by a computing platform (e.g., [0223]), causes the computing platform to perform a method comprising: flagging one or more conflicts between a plurality of elements of a schematic drawing of a project and one or more of structural, architectural and trade elements based on routing information of the plurality of elements (e.g., [0153]-[0156]: “each alert (conflict) bubble could then be assigned to a specific trade and colored”); generating, at an output device, a plurality of selectable options for resolving the one or more conflicts (e.g., Fig. 17 #338, [0161]: “As illustrated in Fig. 17, Alert Control dialog box 336 includes an Alert Resolution Proposal Manager 338”, “the Alert Control dialog box 336 includes a Targeting tab 340 that opens a targeting screen 360, illustrated in Fig. 19, that offers several thorough solutions to the conflict”); resolving the one or more conflicts based on a selection, via the output device, of one of the plurality of selectable options to provide one or more resolved conflicts (e.g., [0161]-[0165]: “that allows the user to test different possible resolutions of the conflict by moving different objects”); and generating a co-ordination drawing of the project, the coordination drawing providing routing information of the plurality of elements based on the one or more resolved conflicts (e.g., [0161]: “making any permanent changes to the drawing”, [0165]-[0166]: “The process of trying different resolutions and identifying new potential conflicts would continue unit a set of proposed resolutions could be define that would clear all of the conflicts without creating new ones that could not be resolved.”). 26. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 25, wherein resolving the one or more conflicts includes redirecting at least one of the plurality of elements to avoid the one or more conflicts (e.g., [0161]-[0165]: “that allows the user to test different possible resolutions of the conflict by moving different objects”, “the HVAC duct 308 and pipe 310 are moved down in order to avoid the conflict with beam 302”). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN A JARRETT whose telephone number is (571)272-3742. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30. 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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at 571-272-9774. 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. /RYAN A JARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116 01/16/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 12, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596350
Linear Actuator Buckling Force Control
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596356
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR LOCALIZATION OF FAULTS IN AN INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING PLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593646
Automated Fault Detection in Microfabrication
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591218
INDUSTRIAL DIGITAL TWIN MODEL ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591219
INDUSTRIAL INTERNET OF THINGS SYSTEMS FOR ABNORMAL ANALYSIS, METHODS, AND STORAGE MEDIUM THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
81%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+7.7%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 861 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