DETAILED ACTION
This FINAL action is responsive to the amendment filed 4/27/2026 and IDS filed 12/16/2025.
In the amendment Claims 1-20 remain pending. Claims 1, 8 and 15 are the independent claims.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/16/2025 has been entered, and considered by the examiner.
35 U.S.C. 112(f) Interpretation
5. The 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation has been withdrawn in light of the arguments which point out the structural terms such as actuator used in the claim which is not to be interpreted has a generic placeholder language but defines structural connotation.
Withdrawn Rejections
6. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 1-20 have been withdrawn in light of the amendment.
7. The 35 U.S.C. 101 abstract idea rejection of claims 1-20 has been withdrawn in light of the persuasive arguments has it controls a physical machine via actuator directed to practical application of fuzzy logic to engine control which includes turning on pumps, opening or closing valves, increasing/decreasing/maintaining oil pressure etc., has outlined in the specification paragraphs 133-135.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
8. Claims 1, 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The specification does not adequately support the claimed AI-based fuzzy logic system (FLS) having machine learning capabilities. While the claim expressly requires an FLS with machine learning functionality, the specification and drawings merely state that the processor implements such capabilities without describing any specific machine learning model, algorithm, training process, learned parameters, or integration with the disclosed fuzzy logic architecture. References to “machine learning” elsewhere in the specification are similarly conclusory, identify it only as an optional technique or describe knowledge-based approaches without algorithmic detail. As a result, the specification does not reasonably demonstrate that the inventor possessed the claimed FLS with machine learning capabilities at the time of filing, but instead describes only a desired result.
Dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) has they inherit the deficiency of the Independent claim.
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant’s arguments filed 4/27/2026 has been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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 MANGLESH M PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5937. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 10:30 am to 7:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Erin D. Bishop, can be reached at telephone number 571-270-3713. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/Manglesh M Patel/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665
7/10/2026
Prosecution Insights