Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/685,460

AIR-CONDITIONING CONTROL SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 21, 2024
Examiner
BRADFORD, JONATHAN
Art Unit
3763
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Daikin Industries, LTD
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
880 granted / 1159 resolved
+5.9% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
1185
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
48.5%
+8.5% vs TC avg
§102
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
§112
25.3%
-14.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1159 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-2, 11-13, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura (JP 2021-57008; note that US 2022/0316741 is utilized herein as an English translation) in view of Matsuura (US 2021/0140670). As to claim 1, Nishimura teaches an air conditioning control system for performing air conditioning of a target space, the system comprising: a processor (paragraph 63) including a generation unit configured to generate a plurality of candidates for an operation condition of the air conditioner (Fig. 6, step S202); a prediction unit configured to use a learning model in order to predict a comfort level of occupants based on the operation condition (paragraphs 122-123); an evaluation unit configured to evaluate the environment state corresponding to the operation condition (paragraphs 124-125); an extraction unit configured to extract the operation condition for which an evaluation by the evaluation unit satisfies a predetermined condition (Fig. 6, step S204); and a control unit 40 configured to control the air-conditioning apparatus with the extracted operation condition (Fig. 1; paragraph 133). Nishimura does not explicitly teach utilizing the prediction unit to predict an environment state of the target space as claimed. However, one of ordinary skill would recognize the advantage of determining a future environment state when predicting a future comfort level of occupants. Furthermore, Matsuura teaches using a prediction unit 25 to predict an environment state based on acquired data (paragraph 77). In light of this teaching it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Nishimura such that the prediction unit predicts an environment state of the target space as claimed in order to increase the accuracy of user comfort predictions. As to claim 2, Nishimura teaches the processor including a learning unit configured to generate the learning model (paragraph 74). As to claims 11 and 17, Nishimura teaches use of reinforcement learning (paragraph 6). As to claim 12, Nishimura teaches generating operation condition candidates for a next operation based on the current operation condition (paragraphs 120-123). As to claims 13 and 18, the control system of Nishimura is capable of operating to control an air conditioner that targets a space including an aisle between server racks. Claims 3-10 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura and Matsuura as applied in the rejections above, and further in view of Ono (JP 2004-069273, see English translation included with IDS filed 2/21/2024). As to claim 3, Nishimura does not explicitly teach that the processor utilizes a computational fluid dynamics simulation in the manner as claimed. However, Ono teaches that it is known to perform a CFD simulation to determining indoor conditioning distributions (see last three lines of page 4 and first paragraph of page 5). In light of this teaching it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to modify the processor Nishimura to include a unit performing a computational fluid dynamics simulation and to predict the environment state using the simulation in order to improve the accuracy of the prediction for the entire space. As to claim 4, the modified apparatus would be capable of performing the intended use of utilizing explanatory and objective variables in the manner as claimed. As to claims 5-6, the modified apparatus teaches most of the limitations of the claims as discussed in the rejections of claims 3-4 above, but does not explicitly teach use of a second environment state having a lower simulation accuracy. However, such a numerical method is well understood in mathematics and engineering and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use such a method in order to improve the accuracy of the calculations. As to claims 7-10, the modified apparatus teaches the limitations of the claims for the same reasons as discussed in the rejections of claims above. As to claims 14-16, the claims are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in the rejections above. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, filed 12/15/2025, with respect to the objection to the specification and claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Said objection and 112(f) interpretation have been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-12, filed with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 102 & 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Matsuura (US 2021/0140670). Conclusion This correspondence is being made NON-FINAL to afford the applicant the opportunity to respond to the new ground(s) of rejection. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN BRADFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-5199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:00 ET. 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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at (571)270-5054. 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. /JONATHAN BRADFORD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 21, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 15, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 10, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 17, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 17, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 06, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601535
Glass Heat Zone Control
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595949
REFRIGERATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595947
SYSTEM AND METHOD OF MONITOR QUALITY OF A REFRIGERANT IN A COOLING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590744
REDUCTION OF POWER CONSUMPTION IN TRANSPORT REFRIGERATION UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590722
System and Method for Detecting a Refrigerant Leak in an HVAC System Operating in an Idle Mode
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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.3%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1159 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month