Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/542,562

DETERMINING EQUIPMENT CONSTANT UPDATES BY MACHINE LEARNING

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Dec 15, 2023
Priority
Nov 28, 2022 — CIP of 12/504,726
Examiner
PATEL, JIGNESHKUMAR C
Art Unit
2116
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Applied Materials Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
372 granted / 469 resolved
+24.3% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
485
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
§103
53.6%
+13.6% vs TC avg
§102
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
§112
9.5%
-30.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 469 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Status of the Application 2. Claim amendment filed on 6/12/26 have been entered and considered. Claim 4-5, 11-12, and 18-19 are in pending status. Claim 1-3, 6-10, 13-17, and 20 are allowed. Response to Arguments 3. The prior art rejection for claim 1-20 have been withdrawn in light of the claim amendment filed on 6/12/26. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 4. Claim 4-5, 11-12, and 18-19 recites the limitation "the performed adjustment". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note: Examiner suggest to correct it to “the manually performed adjustment” to overcome the rejection. Allowable Subject Matter 5. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter for claim 1: None of the prior art on record taken either alone or in obvious combination disclose “providing, to the trained machine learning model as second input data, an indication of a manually performed adjustment to the equipment constant, different than the recommended adjustment; and retraining the trained machine learning model based on a difference between the recommended adjustment to the equipment constant and the manually performed adjustment to the equipment constant to generate a retrained machine learning model” with the remaining claimed features and limitations. 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.” 6. Claim 2-3, and 6-7 are allowed due to direct/indirect dependency on claim 1. 7. Independent claim 8 and 15 also recites the same allowable subject matter as claim 1. Hence claim 8 and its dependent claim 9-10, 13-14, independent claim 15 and its dependent claim 16-17, and 20 are also allowed. 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 JIGNESHKUMAR C PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-0698. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM. 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 M. 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. /JIGNESHKUMAR C PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 15, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 05, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 05, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 12, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 05, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12748409
PRODUCTION LINE DESIGN APPARATUS, PRODUCTION LINE DESIGN SYSTEM, AND PRODUCTION LINE DESIGN METHOD
3y 0m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12738742
APPARATUS, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR OPERATING AND PROTECTING ELECTRIC VEHICLE AS A POWER SOURCE
3y 0m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12736242
PREDICTIVE TEMPERATURE SCHEDULING FOR A THERMOSTAT USING MACHINE LEARNING
3y 2m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12736945
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR COMPUTING TOOLPATHS FOR MACHINING POCKETS
2y 7m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12730422
MODEL SELECTION APPARATUS, MODEL SELECTION METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 08, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+21.2%)
2y 9m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 469 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