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 .
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 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,142,045 (hereinafter ‘045). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Current Application ‘045
Claim 1:
obtaining, with a computing system, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) model, the generative AI model having been trained to output one or more subsequent events based on an input;
inputting, by the computing system, a first sequence of at least one event or one or more event parameters to the generative AI model, the at least one event being associated with a positional encoding representing a physical location;
predicting, with the generative AI model, a second sequence of at least one event subsequent to the first sequence of at least one event based on the first sequence of at least one event and the positional encoding or the one or more event parameters; and
storing, with the computing system, the second sequence of at least one event in memory.
Claim 1:
obtaining, with a computing system, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) model, the generative AI model having been trained to output a predicted sequence of events;
inputting, by the computer system, a first sequence of at least one event to the generative AI model, the at least one event being associated with a positional encoding representing a physical location in a region of physical space at which the at least one event occurred;
predicting, with the generative AI model, a second sequence of at least one event subsequent to the first sequence of at least one event based on the first sequence of at least one event and the positional encoding; and
storing, with the computer system, the second sequence of at least one event in memory.
Current Application ‘045
Claim 21:
obtaining, with a computing system, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) model, the generative AI model having been trained to output a predicted sequence of events in response to input, wherein the predicted sequence of events are not natural language text tokens, and the events are part of an at least partially stochastic process that occurs at location in physical space;
inputting, by the computing system, a first sequence of at least one event to the generative AI model, the at least one event being associated with a positional encoding representing a location in physical space at which the at least one event occurred or one or more event parameters;
predicting, with the generative AI model, a second sequence of at least one event subsequent to the first sequence of events based on the first sequence of at least one event and the positional encoding or the one or more event parameters; and
storing, with the computing system, the second sequence of at least one event in memory.
Claim 1:
obtaining, with a computing system, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) model, the generative AI model having been trained to output a predicted sequence of events in response to receiving predicate events, wherein the predicted sequence of events are not natural language text tokens, and the events are part of an at least partially stochastic process that occurs over a region of physical space;
inputting, by the computer system, a first sequence of at least one event to the generative AI model, the at least one event being associated with a positional encoding representing a physical location in the region of physical space at which the at least one event occurred;
predicting, with the generative AI model, a second sequence of at least one event subsequent to the first sequence of events based on the first sequence of at least one event and the positional encoding; and
storing, with the computer system, the second sequence of at least one event in memory.
Claim 2 of the current application corresponds to claim 2 of ‘045.
Claim 3 of the current application corresponds to claim 3 of ‘045.
Claim 5 of the current application corresponds to claim 5 of ‘045.
Claim 8 of the current application corresponds to claim 8 of ‘045.
Claim 9 of the current application corresponds to claim 9 of ‘045.
Claim 11 of the current application corresponds to claim 11 of ‘045.
Claim 14 of the current application corresponds to claim 14 of ‘045.
Claim 15 of the current application corresponds to claim 15 of ‘045.
Claim 17 of the current application corresponds to claim 17 of ‘045.
Claims 4, 7, 10 and 22-28 do not correspond to any claims of ‘045.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25-28 are allowed.
Claims 4, 7, 10 and 22-24 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and provided that the Double Patenting rejection is overcome.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLOTTE M BAKER whose telephone number is (571)272-7459. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, JENNIFER MEHMOOD can be reached at (571)272-2976. 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.
/CHARLOTTE M BAKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2664
17 June 2026
Prosecution Insights