Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/782,511

NIGHT CYCLE FOR A LAUNDRY APPLIANCE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jul 24, 2024
Priority
Jul 02, 2021 — continuation of 12/055,909
Examiner
SURYAWANSHI, SURESH
Art Unit
2116
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
WHIRLPOOL Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
953 granted / 1078 resolved
+33.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
1090
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
§103
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
§102
35.9%
-4.1% vs TC avg
§112
9.2%
-30.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1078 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-20 are presented for examination. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-2, 4, 6-8, 11, 13-16, and 18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 6-9, 11, 14-15, and 17-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12055909. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claim the same invention of night cycle algorithm for a laundry appliance to minimize operational noise. A comparison between independent claim 1 of the current application and independent claim 1 of the US Patent 12055909 is provided below for an example. Current Application 18/782511 US Patent 12055909 Claim 1. A laundry appliance, comprising: a drum disposed within a cabinet; a motor disposed within the cabinet and operably coupled to at least one of the drum and a fan; and a controller communicatively coupled with the motor, wherein the controller includes a night cycle algorithm configured to minimize operational noise of the motor during a laundry cycle of the night cycle algorithm, and wherein the controller is configured to select from a plurality of routines of the night cycle algorithm, wherein the plurality of routines includes an alteration cycle that includes a plurality of pauses within the laundry cycle, and wherein the controller is configured to prolong each pause of the plurality of pauses by stopping the motor for a predetermined time frame. Claim 1. A laundry appliance, comprising: a cabinet including a user interface; a drum disposed within the cabinet; a motor disposed within the cabinet and operably coupled to the drum; and a controller communicatively coupled with the user interface and the motor, wherein the controller includes a night cycle algorithm configured to minimize operational noise of the motor and the drum, and wherein the controller is configured to select from a plurality of routines of the night cycle algorithm, wherein the night cycle algorithm is configured to adjust a drainage operation of the drum via the controller, and wherein the night cycle algorithm includes a drainage routine that includes at least one of a high water routine and a time-based routine during which the controller is configured to activate the drainage operation. Claim 12. The laundry dryer of claim 11, wherein the motor activation routine includes a plurality of pauses, and wherein the controller is configured to prolong the plurality of pauses by stopping the motor for a predetermined time frame. Claims 3, 5, 9-10, 12, 17, and 19-20 are objected as being dependent on rejected parent claim(s). The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US-20200190726 discloses to provide a laundry machine that may meet spinning performance and/or a drying function by allowing a user to select a night mode or a silent mode in an environment requiring low noise or low vibration and controlling heat-spinning to be automatically performed in such modes, and a control method of the same. US-20200181830 discloses when the washing and the drying are performed in the night mode course, the heat-spinning may be performed, regardless of the heat-spinning option. N. EP-3124689 discloses a motor for driving a compressor cooling fan is a variable speed motor and the method further comprises receiving a user-input indicating the option silent-mode or night-mode for operating the dryer. O. CN-101696541 discloses a method for controlling operation of washing machine at night. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SURESH K SURYAWANSHI whose telephone number is (571)272-3668. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 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 5712729774. 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. /SURESH SURYAWANSHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 24, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 31, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704980
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING SOLID STATE STORAGE DEVICES IN LOW TEMPERATURE ENVIRONMENT
2y 8m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12697779
APPARATUS, METHODS, AND SYSTEMS FOR CALIBRATING 3D PRINTERS
3y 0m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12697780
TRANSPARENT SUPPORT BATH FOR EMBEDDED 3D PRINTING AND SYSTEM FOR IN PROCESS MONITORING
3y 4m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12690948
Systems for Chronologically Tracking Dental Treatment Modalities for a Plurality of Patients
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12686120
METHOD FOR THE OPEN-LOOP AND CLOSED-LOOP CONTROL OF A DEVICE INCLUDING A MOVEMENT MODULE DURING THE INTERACTION OF THE DEVICE WITH A HUMAN, AND DEVICE CONTROLLED IN SUCH A MANNER
4y 2m to grant Granted Jul 21, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+12.5%)
2y 5m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1078 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