Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/647,493

ASYMMETRIC REDUNDANCY SYSTEM FOR COMPUTATION ON AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 26, 2024
Examiner
AHMED, MASUD
Art Unit
3657
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Torc Robotics, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
969 granted / 1178 resolved
+30.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
1205
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.9%
-29.1% vs TC avg
§103
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
§102
21.7%
-18.3% vs TC avg
§112
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1178 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bailey (US20190205218), in view of Costin (US20220057798). Claims 1, 9 and 15, BAILEY teaches a system for computing asymmetric computing redundancy, the system comprising: a plurality of computing systems of an autonomy system, wherein each of the plurality of computing systems comprises at least one memory device and at least one processor: (BAILEY, paras [0015]–[0019] [0056] diagrams, disclose “multiple processors operating in parallel within a computing system,” wherein “each processor includes processing logic and associated memory including cache and local memory.” each having at least one processor and at least one memory device, within an autonomous or high-reliability computing architecture); the processor configured to: write state data to a state memory device (BAILEY, paras [0020]–[0024], [0036], disclose that “runtime state information, including register state, cache contents, and execution context, may be stored in memory to preserve the operational state of a processor.” This explicitly teaches writing state data to a memory device corresponding to a state memory device); Receive data descriptive of the plurality of computing systems from the autonomy system; and process the data from the autonomy system; execute the autonomy system; (BAILEY, paras [0033]–[0036], disclose that monitoring circuitry “receives operational data and runtime information from multiple processors” and that the processors “execute program instructions corresponding to system workloads.” The receipt and processing of operational data and execution of system workloads correspond to receiving, processing, and executing an autonomy system); An auxiliary computing system configured to: detect a condition within a computing system of the plurality of computing systems (BAILEY, paras [0032]–[0035], disclose that “monitoring circuitry detects runtime state errors, processor faults, or abnormal operating conditions associated with one or more processors.” The monitoring circuitry functions as an auxiliary computing system that detects a condition within one of the computing systems); Write the state data from the state memory device to the auxiliary computing system (BAILEY, paras [0037]–[0038], disclose that “state reload circuitry retrieves runtime state information from memory and loads the retrieved runtime state into another processor.” This teaches transferring state data from a state memory device to another computing system, satisfying this limitation); And reconnect the autonomy system to the auxiliary computing system; BAILEY does not explicitly disclose reconnecting the autonomy system or sensor inputs to the auxiliary computing system, While BAILEY teaches loading runtime state into another processor, it does not expressly describe rerouting system inputs or reconnecting the autonomy system; COSTIN, paras [0022]–[0028], disclose that “upon detection of a controller failure, sensor data streams may be redirected to a secondary controller to allow continued vehicle operation.” Further, para [0043] discloses that “the backup controller receives sensor data and executes vehicle control functions.”, thus, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of BAILEY to reconnect the autonomy system to the auxiliary computing system as taught by COSTIN in order to enable continued autonomous operation following a detected fault, thereby improving system reliability and fault tolerance. Claims 2 and 10, wherein the auxiliary computing system is a monitor module for the autonomy system, is taught by BAILEY, paras [0029]–[0033], which explicitly disclose monitoring circuitry configured to observe processor operation and detect fault conditions. Claims 3 and 11, further comprising connecting the auxiliary computing system to a plurality of sensors of the autonomy system, is not explicitly taught by the primary reference. However, COSTIN, paras [0013]–[0021] and [0022]–[0030], disclose connecting a backup controller to vehicle sensors and routing sensor data streams to that controller upon failure. It would have been obvious to incorporate such sensor connectivity into the auxiliary computing system of the BAILEY to allow continued autonomous operation. Claims 4, 12 and 18, wherein the condition comprises a processor malfunction, an auxiliary computing failure, or a data corruption, is taught by BAILEY, paras [0029]–[0035], which disclose detecting processor faults, runtime errors, and corrupted runtime state data. Claims 5, 13 and 16, wherein the auxiliary computing system is further configured to execute program data from a program memory device, is taught by BAILEY, paras [0037]–[0041], which disclose that the processor receiving the reloaded runtime state resumes execution of program instructions. Claims 6 and 14, wherein the program memory device and the state memory device are compartmentalized from each other, is taught by BAILEY, paras [0020]–[0024], [0036], which distinguish executable program memory from runtime state and cache memory. Claims 7 and 8, wherein the plurality of computing systems are an FPGA or a microcontroller, (para 0042) [0032], BAILEY discloses processors and computing devices.. Claim 17, Bailey teaches initiating a redundancy procedure upon detection of a fault condition (Bailey, paras [0033]–[0036]). Claim 19, Bailey and Costin together teach continued autonomous execution after a fault without restarting the system, which inherently prevents triggering a minimum risk maneuver that would otherwise be performed in response to a detected failure (Bailey, paras [0045]–[0053]; Costin, paras [0031]–[0040]). Claim 20, Bailey teaches monitoring circuitry that detects fault conditions independently of the processor experiencing the fault, making detection of the condition on the first processor by a second processor or monitor an obvious aspect of the disclosed fault-tolerant architecture (Bailey, paras [0029]–[0033]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MASUD AHMED whose telephone number is (571)270-1315. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-8:30 PM PST with IFP. 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, Abby Lin can be reached at 571 270 3976. 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. MASUD . AHMED Primary Examiner Art Unit 3657A /MASUD AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 26, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596012
METHOD FOR DETERMINING POINT OF INTEREST FOR USER, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589729
LOAD BALANCING APPROACH TO EXECUTE COST OPTIMIZATION IN MULTI-MODE AND MULTI-GEAR HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589777
VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12578723
VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578739
Vehicle Control System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
82%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+13.2%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1178 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