Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 19/032,519

METHOD AND DEVICE FOR ERROR DETECTION, IN PARTICULAR FOR ERROR CORRECTION, IN IN-MEMORY COMPUTATIONS

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 21, 2025
Priority
Feb 01, 2024 — DE 10 2024 200 934.2 +1 more
Examiner
CHAUDRY, MUJTABA M
Art Unit
4100
Tech Center
4100
Assignee
Robert Bosch GmbH
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 0m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
709 granted / 840 resolved
+24.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+3.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
865
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
§103
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
§102
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§112
40.0%
+0.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 840 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Applicants’ response filed 7/9/26 has been considered. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-19 are pending. Rejections under 35 USC 112 are maintained in view of remarks made herein. Application is pending. 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 1-19 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. For example, claim 1 recites: PNG media_image1.png 284 826 media_image1.png Greyscale The claim states, “…at least one memory cell configured to determine a checksum that includes a resistance that is the same as a sum of the respective resistances of the set of memory cells.” It is not clear how the memory cell is able to determine/compute a checksum. The memory cell may have a resistance but it is not able to determine the checksum. There must be another device or controller which does the actual determination of the checksum. Essential elements are missing from the claim. Independent claim 13 is rejected for similar reasons. Respective dependent claims are rejected for similar reasons. Corrections are requested. It is the Examiner’s conclusion that the claims of the present application, as presented, are not clear. Applicants are encouraged to formulate claim language that clearly defines the novelty of the application. If Applicants believe an interview might be useful, then they are welcome to contact the Examiner with proposed amendments for a discussion. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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

Jan 21, 2025
Application Filed
May 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jul 09, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 22, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704547
AUTOMATED TEST EQUIPMENT AND METHOD USING A TRIGGER GENERATION
1y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12700947
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SIGNAL OPTIMIZATION ADJUSTMENT BASED ON DIFFERENT HEAT SOURCE INFORMATION
2y 1m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12699131
FLEXIBLE TEST INSTRUCTION SET ARCHITECTURE
1y 10m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12695540
SCHEDULING METHOD FOR LDPC DECODING
6y 8m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12688086
VOTING SCHEME IN A MEMORY PAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 21, 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
84%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+3.7%)
2y 7m (~1y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 840 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