Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 28, 2026
Application No. 18/951,366

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DETERMINING ERRORS DURING EXECUTION OF MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Nov 18, 2024
Priority
Apr 02, 2024 — continuation of 12/147,292
Examiner
LOTTICH, JOSHUA P
Art Unit
2113
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Citigroup Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allowance Rate
696 granted / 767 resolved
+35.7% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
783
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
§103
37.5%
-2.5% vs TC avg
§102
12.6%
-27.4% vs TC avg
§112
15.8%
-24.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 767 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. As per claim(s) 15-20, they are rejected because the applicant has provided evidence that the applicant intends the term "non-transitory, computer-readable medium" to include non-statutory matter. The applicant describes a computer-readable storage medium as including open ended language and thus it is reasonable to interpret it to include all possible mediums, including non-statutory mediums (A non-transitory computer-readable or processor-readable media includes both computer storage media and tangible storage media that facilitate transfer of a computer program from one place to another. A non-transitory processor-readable storage media can be any available media that can be accessed by a computer. By way of example, and not limitation, such non-transitory processor-readable media can comprise RAM, ROM, EEPROM, CD-ROM or other optical disk storage, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other tangible storage medium that can be used to store desired program code in the form of instructions or data structures and that can be accessed by a computer or processor, [0091]). The words "storage", "tangible", and/or "recording" are insufficient to convey only statutory embodiments to one of ordinary skill in the art absent an explicit and deliberate limiting definition or clear differentiation between storage media and transitory media in the disclosure. As such, the claim(s) is/are drawn to a form of energy. Energy is not one of the four categories of invention and therefore this/these claim(s) is/are not statutory. Energy is not a series of steps or acts and thus is not a process. Energy is not a physical article or object and as such is not a machine or manufacture. Energy is not a combination of substances and therefore not a composition of matter. Since the specification describes "a non-transitory, computer-readable medium” as comprising both transitory and non-transitory media, the claim encompasses both and is therefore non-statutory. The examiner suggests amending the specification to remove “non-transitory” so that the term is not redefined to include non-statutory matter. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-14 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Prior art was not found that explicitly teaches or fairly suggests “execute, according to the preconfigured mapping, the second debug operation set for determining a second result using the error metadata, the second result indicating a report generation operation” in combination with “generate, by executing the report generation operation indicated by the second result, an error report comprising updated error metadata based on the first result and the second result” and “the first result indicating a second debug operation set”, as outlined in independent claim 1. Prior art was not found that explicitly teaches or fairly suggests “executing, according to the preconfigured mapping, the second debug operation set for determining a second result using the error metadata, the second result indicating a report generation operation” in combination with “generating, by executing the report generation operation indicated by the second result, an error report comprising updated error metadata based on the first result and the second result” and “the first result indicating a second debug operation set”, as outlined in independent claim 8. The remaining claims, not specifically mentioned, are allowed because they are dependent upon one of the claims mentioned above. These limitations are considered allowable only in combination with all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mahajan (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0121145) discloses synchronizing debug information generation according to a predetermined map ([0036]). Sainath (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0074471) discloses a map that helps facilitate the debugging process and reports errors and problems ([0028]). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA P LOTTICH whose telephone number is (571)270-3738. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri, 9:00am - 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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at 5712723655. 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. /JOSHUA P LOTTICH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2113
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 18, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101
Apr 30, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12639152
DYNAMIC NETWORK DEBUG SERVICE IN A CONTAINERIZED COMPUTING CLUSTER
1y 9m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12619490
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ELECTRONIC INTERACTION RECOVERY VIA MULTIMODAL MACHINE LEARNING MODELS
2y 1m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12613757
CORE TEST METHOD AND CORE TEST CIRCUIT
2y 12m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12613767
PARKING THREADS IN BARREL PROCESSOR FOR MANAGING HAZARD CLEARING
1y 8m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12613760
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GENERATING RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON REAL-TIME MAPPING OF SYSTEM COMPONENTS IN SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS LINEAGE LOGS
12m to grant Granted Apr 28, 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
91%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+4.3%)
2y 2m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 767 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