Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/953,055

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GRAPH TRAVERSAL FOR APPROXIMATE NEAREST NEIGHBOR SEARCH

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Nov 19, 2024
Priority
Nov 21, 2023 — provisional 63/601,663
Examiner
HOANG, KEN
Art Unit
2168
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 5m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allowance Rate
283 granted / 390 resolved
+17.6% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
418
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
93.7%
+53.7% vs TC avg
§102
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§112
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 390 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. Examiner Notes (1) In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. This will assist in expediting compact prosecution. MPEP 714.02 recites: “Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP § 2163.06. An amendment which does not comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.121 (b), (c), (d), and (h) may be held not fully responsive. See MPEP § 714.” Amendments not pointing to specific support in the disclosure may be deemed as not complying with provisions of 37 C.F.R. 1.131 (b), (c), (d), and (h) and therefore held not fully responsive. Generic statements such as "Applicants believe no new matter has been introduced" may be deemed insufficient. (2) Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. Remarks Receipt of Applicant’s Amendment file on 02/03/2026 is acknowledged. Response to Arguments Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection and 103 rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 11/05/2025. 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. Claim 10 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 1 recites the limitation “compute a distance, using the graph information, between the vertex and a candidate neighbor of the at least one vertex to generate a distance result” in line 9-11 of the claim. Dependent claim 5 recites “compute a current distance in a current iteration using the allocator data to generate a distance result” in lines 5-6 of the claim. Further, line 1 of claim 10 (claim 10 is a dependent claim and its parents/grandparents claim includes claim 1-5) recites, “the at least one distance in the distance result”; it is unclear which “the distance result” is being referenced, whether it is “distance result” regarding current distance calculation based on allocator data in claim 5, or “distance result” regarding a distance calculation based on graph information in claim 1. Also, “the at least one distance in the distance result” has not introduced in parent claims of claim 10 (claims 1-5). The claim is unclear and indefinite due to the lack of clear antecedent basis for these elements. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEN HOANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8401. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-5:00pm. 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, Charles Rones can be reached at (571)272-4085. 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. /KEN HOANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2168
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 19, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jan 16, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 16, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 03, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 10, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12650681
CLOUD-BASED DATA RECORDER AND EVENT PROCESSOR
4y 6m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12625848
MESH NETWORK SYSTEM OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DEVICES
3y 6m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12596751
IMAGE SYNTHESIS BASED ON PREDICTIVE ANALYTICS
4y 3m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12579118
SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR AUTOMATED STANDARDIZATION OF HETEROGENEOUS DATA USING MACHINE LEARNING
1y 3m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12531138
PARAMETERIZED TEMPLATE FOR CLINICAL RESEARCH STUDY SYSTEMS
4y 6m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+30.2%)
3y 1m (~1y 5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 390 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