Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/537,036

APPARATUS FOR SUPPORTING LEARNING BASED ON REAL TIME BRAIN WAVE AND LEARNING STATE AND OPERATION METHOD FOR THE SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 12, 2023
Examiner
MUSSELMAN, TIMOTHY A
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Seoul National University R&Db Foundation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
542 granted / 936 resolved
-12.1% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
965
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.1%
-29.9% vs TC avg
§103
55.3%
+15.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§112
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 936 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nel et al. (US 11,545,046). Regarding claim 1, Nel discloses a learning system, wherein at least first and second brain wave signals of a subject are measured, one representative of a rest state and one of a learning state. See col. 7: 46-51 and col. 8: 1-11 (i.e. a rest state would be a brain wave below the low anxiety threshold, and a learning state would be a brain wave above the same threshold yet below the high anxiety threshold). Nel discloses a learning success criterion based on the brain wave signals as learning success or learning failure. See col. 9: 15-27. Nel discloses measuring a third brain wave of the subject while content is being provided, and a policy for the content is determined, based upon success criterion and the learning state measurement index. See col. 8: 21-31. With specific regard to claim 9, Nel discloses storing a code for learning policies in col. 10: 5-18. 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. Claims 2-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nel et al. (US 11,545,046) in view of Rausch (US 8,744,855). Regarding claims 2-4 and 6, Nel discloses wherein learning content is categorized based upon various factors, including content type, and wherein the amount and difficulty of content for a user are adjusted up or down, as material is relearned if required, based upon the user’s success criterion, which has been determined from previous sessions (i.e. ‘third waves’). See col. 4: 62-65, col. 6: 8-38, and col 6: 50-59. However, Nel does not disclose wherein the content is categorized by type, more specifically as text (claims 2-4) or video (claim 6). However, this is a common category in similar education presentation systems, as is disclosed by the adaptive learning system of Rausch in col. 9: 15-44. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to consider such categories with the Nel system, so as to effectively categorize learning parameters. Regarding claim 5, Nel discloses wherein the metrics can comprise concentration and mood. See col. 6: 8-16. Regarding claim 7, Nel discloses video learning (VR) and evaluations and re-learning in col. 4: 55-67. Regarding claim 8, Nel discloses wherein the recommendation to relearn content can be based upon numerous factors. See col. 9: 6-28. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:00AM - 4:00PM. 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, PETER S VASAT can be reached at 571-570-7625. 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. TIMOTHY A. MUSSELMAN Primary Examiner Art Unit 3715 /TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 12, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 08, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599535
EXTERNAL COUNTERPULSATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576005
Cameras for Emergency Rescue
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573315
TRAINING LESSON AUTHORING AND EXECUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12548463
ELECTRONIC COUPLING OF CONTROLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12530981
MONITORING COMMUNICATIONS IN AN OBSERVATION PLATFORM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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
58%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+26.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 936 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