Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 26, 2026
Application No. 19/027,065

METHODS AND DEVICES FOR VECTOR SEGMENTATION FOR CODING

Final Rejection §101§112
Filed
Jan 17, 2025
Priority
Nov 07, 2013 — provisional 61/901,089 +7 more
Examiner
LELAND III, EDWIN S
Art Unit
2654
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson
OA Round
2 (Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
75%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allowance Rate
358 granted / 475 resolved
+13.4% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-0.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
11 currently pending
Career history
493
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
§103
44.3%
+4.3% vs TC avg
§102
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
§112
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 475 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §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 . Status of Claims Claims 2-16 are newly added leaving claims 1-16 pending in this application. 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. Claims 1-16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: What E1 and E0 represent in claims 1 and 8, and what ER and EL represent in claims 2 and 9. Claims 3-7 and 10-16 inherit these deficiencies. 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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites determining energy values, calculating an angle between them, then distributing bits based on segment lengths and the above calculations, which is a mathematical concept. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the only additional element in the claim is obtaining the input vector, which is extra-solutional data gathering. The claim does include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the only additional element in the claim is obtaining the input vector, which is extra-solutional data gathering. The newly added claims do not add any limitations that are not either directed to a mathematical concept, extra solutional data gathering or generic computer components performing generic computing functions. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed 10/6/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under double patenting have been fully considered and are persuasive. Because a Terminal Disclaimer has been filed, but as of this writing has not been approved., the rejection of claim 1 under double patenting has been held in abeyance. Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed 10/6/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Contrary to the applicant’s arguments, allocating a specific number between two alternatives (i.e. allocating the number of bits between BRSEG and BLSEG) is a mathematical concept and the claims remain directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The rejection of the claims for being directed to non-subject matter eligible material remains in effect. Examiner Notes The Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above 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 considers the references in its 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 as disclosed by the Examiner. Communications via Internet e-mail are at the discretion of the applicant and require written authorization. Should the Applicant wish to communicate via e-mail, including the following paragraph in their response will allow the Examiner to do so: “Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with me concerning any subject matter of this application by electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.” Should e-mail communication be desired, the Examiner can be reached at Edwin.Leland@USPTO.gov 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 EDWIN S LELAND III whose telephone number is (571)270-5678. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:00 M-F. 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, Hai Phan can be reached at 571-272-6338. 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. /EDWIN S LELAND III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2654
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 17, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101, §112
Oct 06, 2026
Response Filed
Oct 16, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12762337
Secure Large Language Model Data Gateway
2y 4m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12748919
Near Real-Time Natural Language Sequence Generation
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12748933
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LANGUAGE TRANSLATION
2y 2m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12744039
SPEECH RECOGNITION METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 3m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12743588
NATURAL LANGUAGE GENERATION USING KNOWLEDGE GRAPH INCORPORATING TEXTUAL SUMMARIES
1y 6m to grant Granted Sep 22, 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
75%
Grant Probability
75%
With Interview (-0.6%)
2y 5m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 475 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