Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/721,768

TRAINING DATA GENERATION METHOD, COMPUTER PROGRAM AND DEVICE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jun 19, 2024
Priority
May 25, 2022 — RE 10-2022-0064298 +1 more
Examiner
VILLECCO, JOHN M
Art Unit
2661
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Airs Medical Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allowance Rate
494 granted / 766 resolved
+2.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
9 currently pending
Career history
777
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
§103
36.8%
-3.2% vs TC avg
§102
20.7%
-19.3% vs TC avg
§112
28.3%
-11.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 766 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s argument, see the response filed September 21, 2026, with respect to the object of claim 12 has been fully considered and are persuasive. In particular, applicant has amended claim 12 to overcome the objection. The objection of claim 12 has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments, see the response filed September 21, 2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. In particular, applicant has amended claim 17 to overcome the rejection. The rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. 101 has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments, see the response filed September 21, 2026, with respect to the the art rejections of claim 1, 3, 4, 7, 10, 11, 14, 16, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. In particular, applicant has amended the independent claims to include the limitation of generating the random noise having a distribution shape that is the same as a distribution shape of noise of an input image. The applied prior art (Langoju, US 2023/0029188 and Hu, US2020/0175368) fails to teach this limitation. The rejection of claims 1 , 3, 4, 7, 10, 11, 14, 16, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 has been withdrawn. However, the amendment introduces new issues requiring a new rejection. See the new grounds of rejection on the following pages. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) – new matter The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claims 1, 14 and 17, applicant has amended the claims to recite some form of the limitation of “generating random noise having a distribution shape that is the same as a distribution shape of noise of an input image”. Applicant cites paragraphs 0080 and 0081 of the specification as providing support for this newly added limitation1. However, these paragraphs do not disclose that the random noise is generated such that it has a distribution shape that is the same as a distribution shape of noise of an input image. Paragraphs 0080 and 0081 state: PNG media_image1.png 169 410 media_image1.png Greyscale At best, these paragraphs merely state that the magnitude of noise in the input image is the same as the input image. These paragraphs do not state that the distribution shape of the random noise is the same as the distribution shape of the input image. They merely state that the distribution shape of the random noise can be modified based on the magnitude of the noise of the input image – for example by scaling the distribution shape. Therefore, this newly added limitation constitutes new matter. Claims 2-13, 15, and 16, are rejected based on their dependency to claims 1 or 14, respectively. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JOHN M VILLECCO whose telephone number is (571)272-7319. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 6:00 AM-4:00 PM EST. 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. 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. /JOHN VILLECCO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2661 1 It is noted that the specification provided on June 19, 2024 does not include paragraph numbers. For purposes of examination, it is assumed that applicant is referring to the US Publication of the current application (US 2025/0061546), which does have paragraph numbers.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 19, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jul 30, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 30, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 21, 2026
Response Filed
Oct 01, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12769785
EDGE-BASED VIDEO CONTENT SEARCH WITH MULTIMODAL CONTENT UNDERSTANDING
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12762750
METHOD FOR DECODING 3D CONTENT, ENCODER, AND DECODER
2y 7m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12755573
ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR DETECTING FEATURE INFORMATION FROM FACE AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF
1y 11m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12749245
IMAGING METHOD FOR STATIC CT APPARATUS, STATIC CT APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND MEDIUM
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12743746
METHOD FOR RECONSTRUCTING HDR IMAGES, TERMINAL, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 7m to grant Granted Sep 22, 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
64%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+9.5%)
2y 6m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 766 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