Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/497,112

Method and System for Predictive Maintenance of Sample Handling System (SHS) of a Gas Analyzer

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Oct 30, 2023
Priority
Apr 30, 2021 — IN 202141019858 +1 more
Examiner
ANWARI, MACEEH
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
ABB Schweiz AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
680 granted / 838 resolved
+21.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
891
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
§103
42.2%
+2.2% vs TC avg
§102
28.0%
-12.0% vs TC avg
§112
13.8%
-26.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 838 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 . DETAILED ACTION This action is in response to communications filed on 10/30/2023. Accordingly, claims 1- 15 are pending. 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 1- 15—in particular Independent claims 1 & 9—are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite determining, detecting and forecasting data. These limitations, as drafted, are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind. But for the processor and/or memory/database language, the claims encompass a user simply comparing the collected data to a predetermined/configurable threshold in his/her mind. The mere nominal recitation of a generic processor and memory does not take the claim limitation out of the mental processes grouping. Thus, the claims recite a mental process which is an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims recite the elements of determining, detecting and forecasting and that a generic computer preform these steps. The determining and detecting steps are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a general means of receiving/transmitting and storing data for use in the forecasting step), and as such they amount to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. The processor that performs the determining and detecting steps is recited at a high level of generality, and merely automates the forecasting step. Each of the additional limitations are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (the processor). The combination of these additional elements are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (the processor). Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claim amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The same analysis applies here in 2B and does not provide an inventive concept. For the determining, detecting and forecasting steps were considered extra-solution activity in Step 2A, this has been re-evaluated in Step 2B and determined to be well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. The background does not provide any indication that the processor is anything other than a generic, off-the-shelf computer component, and the Symantec, TLI, and OIP Techs. court decisions (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)) indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). For these reasons, there is no inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. As per claims 2-8 & 10-15 they all depend from claims 1 and 9 and as such these claims have the same deficiencies as those detailed in claims 1 and 9 above. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MACEEH ANWARI whose telephone number is 571-272-7591. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-9:30. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Ortiz can be reached on 571-272-1206. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. MACEEH . ANWARI Primary Examiner Art Unit 3663 /MACEEH ANWARI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 30, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12742308
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING WORK MACHINE
1y 11m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12732783
CONTROLLING ELECTRONIC DEVICES BY AERIAL VEHICLES
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12725464
TRAILER LOAD DISTRIBUTION SENSING SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 2m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12724420
A METHOD FOR DETERMINING A POSITION DEVIATION, A POSITIONING SYSTEM AND AN UNDERWATER VEHICLE
1y 10m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12709868
DRIVE CONTROL DEVICE FOR CONSTRUCTION MACHINE AND CONSTRUCTION MACHINE PROVIDED WITH SAME
2y 1m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+5.8%)
3y 2m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 838 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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