Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/972,169

Systems and Methods for Roadway Management Including Feedback

Non-Final OA §101§DP
Filed
Dec 06, 2024
Examiner
TRIEU, VAN THANH
Art Unit
2685
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Stc Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
909 granted / 1076 resolved
+22.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1109
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§103
44.6%
+4.6% vs TC avg
§102
36.7%
-3.3% vs TC avg
§112
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1076 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §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 . 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to the apparatus and method for controlling an operating room without significantly more. The independent claim 1 recited the claim "prior to said traveler being picked up by the first vehicle, …” and “determining how said first vehicle will pass through the intersection …” and adjusting signaling at said intersection to allow ….”. The independent 12 recited the claim “receiving a location and direction of travel transmission from said mobile communication device …”, and “detecting a second vehicle approaching said intersection”. This judicial exception are not integrated into a practical application because there are no structures of what and how to determining the priority and approaching the intersection ?, and who receiving the location and direction of travel ?, and finally who and how to adjusting the signal at the intersection ?. determine the relative position therebetween. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claim limitations in claims 1 and 12 are being treated as reciting an abstract idea. 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 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,295,612 and claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,165,509. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of U.S Patent No. US 11,295,612 and 12,165,509 fully encompass, and therefore anticipate the independent claims 1 and 10 accordingly, and wherein the claim “a second vehicle” is inherently meet plurality of travelers with the mobile communication device or the traveler, respectively. And the claims “adjusting signaling at said intersection to allow said first vehicle to pass through said intersection before said second vehicle” is met by adjusting signaling at said intersection to allow more of said travelers to pass through said intersection without stopping than are stopped by said signaling at said intersection, and/or adjusting signaling at said intersection to stop said motorized vehicle from entering said intersection and allow said traveler to pass through said intersection without slowing. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yoshikawa et al discloses an indicating apparatus for preventing vehicles from colliding as they pass through an intersection having visual obstructions, the intersection including a first road on which vehicles do not stop before passing through the intersection and a second road on which vehicles must temporarily stop before entering the intersection, the apparatus comprising: vehicle sensing means located along the first road a predetermined distance from said intersection for detecting vehicles approaching said intersection on the first road; and control means for causing said alarm indicating means to actuate an alarm for a predetermined interval of time after said vehicle sensing means detects a first vehicle approaching said intersection on the first road and for causing said alarm indicating means to continue actuating said alarm if said vehicle sensing means detects a second vehicle approaching said intersection on the first road before said first vehicle has passed said intersection. [US 5,448,219] Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from examiner should be directed to primary examiner craft is Van Trieu whose telephone number is (571) 2722972. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 8:00 AM to 3:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Mr. Wang Quan-Zhen can be reached on (571) 272-3114. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, 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. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair- direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786- 9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /VAN T TRIEU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685 04/06/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 06, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599342
PATIENT REQUEST SYSTEM HAVING PATIENT FALLS RISK NOTIFICATION AND CAREGIVER NOTES ACCESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599522
PATIENT SUPPORT APPARATUSES WITH WIRELESS HEADWALL COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600320
VEHICLE ANTI-THEFT DEVICE AND METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598449
SYNCHRONIZATION BETWEEN DEVICES IN EMERGENCY VEHICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590772
Method and System for Sensing, Monitoring, Logging and Transmitting Events That Is Assembled on a Firearm
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+13.0%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1076 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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