Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/921,630

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR COMPRESSING APPLICATION DATA FOR OPERATIONS ON MULTI-CORE SYSTEMS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Oct 21, 2024
Priority
Jan 24, 2020 — continuation of 11/599,367 +1 more
Examiner
DUNPHY, DAVID F
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Cornami Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
661 granted / 776 resolved
+25.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
786
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.1%
-36.9% vs TC avg
§103
71.6%
+31.6% vs TC avg
§102
9.3%
-30.7% vs TC avg
§112
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 776 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Allowable Subject Matter Claim 1 is currently subject to non-statutory double patent rejections, but is otherwise not subject to any prior art rejections under either 35 U.S.C. § 102 or 35 U.S.C. § 103. Assuming that the foregoing shortcoming of this claim was rectified by the timely filing of a terminal disclaimer, this claim would be allowable. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 1 recites the same patentable features as were found allowable in parent application no. 18/178237, which issued as United States Patent No. 12,126,367 on 22 October 2024. 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. Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,126,367. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as shown in the following table: Present Application Claim 1 U.S. Patent No. 12,126,367 Claim 1 A multi-core system for executing at least one layer of a convolutional neural network, the system comprising: A multi-core system for executing a layer of a convolutional neural network, the system comprising: a storage device storing a compressed weight matrix of a set of weights of the at least one layer of the convolutional network and a decompression matrix, wherein the compressed weight matrix is formed by matrix factorization and quantization of a floating point format of each weight to a floating point composite; a storage device storing a compressed weight matrix of a set of weights of the at least one layer of the convolutional network and a decompression matrix, wherein the compressed weight matrix is formed by matrix factorization and quantization of a floating point format of each weight to a floating point composite; a decompression module operable to obtain an approximation of the weight values by decompressing the compressed weight matrix by expanding the floating point composite of each weight to the floating point format; and … a decompression module operable to obtain an approximation of the weight values by decompressing the compressed weight matrix by expanding the floating point composite of each weight to the floating point format; and a plurality of cores executing the at least one layer of the convolutional neural network with the approximation of weight values to produce an inference output. a plurality of cores, …; and wherein some of the plurality of cores are configured to execute the at least one layer of the convolutional neural network with the approximation of weight values to produce an inference output. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID F DUNPHY whose telephone number is (571)270-1230. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am - 5 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, Vu Le can be reached on 5712727332. 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. /DAVID F DUNPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2673
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 21, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12682463
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12681454
Interference Determination Device
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12670626
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHOD
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12664766
HYPERPARAMETER OPTIMIZATION
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12664779
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATIC IDENTIFICATION OF SPATIAL/TEMPORAL ATTENTION REGIONS AND TRAINING DATA GENERATION USING THE SAME
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 23, 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
85%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+10.1%)
2y 2m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 776 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