Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/788,753

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR UNDOING MACHINE LEARNING CAPABILITY INTENT ACTIONS OF AN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) PRODUCTIVITY TOOL EXECUTING ON AN INFORMATION HANDLING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 30, 2024
Examiner
ELAHEE, MD S
Art Unit
2694
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
DELL PRODUCTS, L.P.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
655 granted / 827 resolved
+17.2% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
855
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.2%
-33.8% vs TC avg
§103
50.4%
+10.4% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
8.9%
-31.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 827 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 Claim Objections Claims 1, 2, 9, 10, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: regarding claim 1, the phrases “user-query inputs” in lines 9-10 and “first user query input” in line 19 should apparently be “user-query input” and “first user-query input” respectively. Claims 2, 9, 10 and 15 are objected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation “the state” in line 21. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 9, 16 and 17 are rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Since claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18-20 are dependent claims, these claims are also rejected. Claim 2 recites the limitation “the intent identification software module” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 10 and 17 are rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 2. Claim 8 recites the limitation “the historic system state buffer” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 recites the limitation “the generated negated intent” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 17 recites the limitations “the one or more AI productivity tool-enablable software applications” in lines 13-14, “the state of the information handing system” in lines 21-22. There are insufficient antecedent basis for this limitations in the claim. Claim 18 recites the limitations “the system state capture software application” in lines 2-3, “the information handling” in line 7. There are insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 19 recites the limitation “the oldest of the plurality of negated intents” in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 20 recites the phrase “the capability intent actions” in line 5 is indefinite. There are two different “a plurality of capability intent actions” in the claims 17 and 19. It is not clear which one is being referred by the phrase. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 are allowed after overcoming the claim objections and claims rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD S ELAHEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7536. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday; 8:30AM to 5:00PM EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FAN TSANG can be reached on 571-272-7547. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /MD S ELAHEE/MD SHAFIUL ALAM ELAHEE Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694 March 9, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 30, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 23, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 02, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604133
SYSTEM AND METHOD OF ASSEMBLING AN ADJUSTABLE CLAMPING EAR CUP ASSEMBLY FOR AN AUDIO HEADSET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596891
CROSS-LINGUAL NATURAL LANGUAGE UNDERSTANDING MODEL FOR MULTI-LANGUAGE NATURAL LANGUAGE UNDERSTANDING (mNLU)
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598260
HYBRID DIGITAL SIGNAL PROCESSING-ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ACOUSTIC ECHO CANCELLATION FOR VIRTUAL CONFERENCES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597412
Contextual Digital Assistant for Presentation Assistance
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585889
NATURAL LANGUAGE GENERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
79%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.8%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 827 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