Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/946,120

AUTOMATED TEST EQUIPMENT AND METHOD USING A TRIGGER GENERATION

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Nov 13, 2024
Priority
Jul 21, 2020 — continuation of PCTEP2020070601 +1 more
Examiner
CHAUDRY, MUJTABA M
Art Unit
2112
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Advantest Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
701 granted / 831 resolved
+29.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+3.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
854
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§103
32.9%
-7.1% vs TC avg
§102
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§112
33.4%
-6.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 831 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
DETAILED ACTION Application filed 11/13/2024 has been examined. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-20 are pending. Specification and drawings are accepted. Application is pending. 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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,467,973. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. For example, claim 1 of the present application teaches a test system comprising: a main test flow controller; and a device communication unit configured to be directly coupled to a device under test (DUT), the device communication unit including a trigger generation unit configured to generate a trigger signal in response to protocol-based data received from the DUT and to communicate the trigger signal to the main test flow controller. Whereas claim 1 of U.S. patent ‘973 teaches an automated test equipment for testing one or more devices under test, the automated test equipment comprising: a main test flow control; a device communication unit which is coupled to the main test flow control via a tester interface and which is adapted to interface with the one or more devices under test; wherein the device communication unit comprises a trigger generation configured to: extract payload data from a protocol-based data stream received from the one of the one or more devices under test; extract one or more protocol events from the protocol-based data stream; and generate a trigger signal in response to the extracted payload data or in response to the one or more protocol events. In both claims the test system/equipment has a main test flow controller/control, a device communication unit and at least one device under test which is connected to the device communication unit. The novelty in both claims, as described in the prior application (patent ‘973) is that the device control/communication unit including a trigger generating unit which generates a trigger signal in response to a protocol-based data received from the device under test. Therefore the claims are obvious embodiments of each other and not patentably distinct. A terminal disclaimer would obviate the rejection. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUJTABA M CHAUDRY whose telephone number is (571)272-3817. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm. 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, Albert DeCady can be reached at 571-272-3819. 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. MUJTABA M. CHAUDRY Primary Examiner Art Unit 2112 /MUJTABA M CHAUDRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2112
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 13, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT
Mar 25, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12640843
METHOD, COMMUNICATION DEVICE, PROCESSING DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR PERFORMING CHANNEL ENCODING, AND METHOD, COMMUNICATION DEVICE, PROCESSING DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR PERFORMING CHANNEL DECODING
1y 7m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12608264
Method and Apparatus for Monitoring and Alerting Errors in a Distributed Storage Network
1y 9m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12603802
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR IDENTIFICATION VIA CHANNELS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT
2y 4m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596946
QUANTUM METADATA LINEAGE TRACING USING QUANTUM MULTIPART ENTANGLED TWIN TECHNOLOGY
3y 0m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587213
METHOD AND SYSTEM OF ERROR INJECTION FOR LOW-DENSITY PARITY-CHECK
3y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
84%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+3.7%)
2y 8m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 831 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