DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 27 January, 2025.
Claims 1 - 20 are currently pending and have been examined.
The present application is a continuation of U.S. Application Number 17/685,164 now U.S. Patent Number 12,211,620.
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 Interpretation
The claims recite receiving first and second data associated with a vehicle accident over time and determining a probability prediction associated with the accident. The claims are directed to collecting and analyzing data to obtain a result, which is an abstract mental process. The claims collect and analyze data to determine the probability prediction, and then transmit instructions to a target computer to initiate a process, essentially providing a notification to an appropriate organization to respond to the accident. However, the claims recite limitations that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. For example, the claims recite a process that delays execution of the decision tree model when additional information is expected, by determining a future model execution time. The specification expressly discloses that delayed execution, as recited, saves computational resources (@ 0047, 0049 as filed).
The prior art of record fails to expressly teach a method and system for determining a probability prediction associated with a motor vehicle accident by receiving and providing accident data to a machine learning model, where the claims, in combination with other recited features, includes determining a future model execution time associated with the machine learning decision tree, receiving additional data associated with the motor vehicle accident prior to the future execution time occurring, and determining the probability prediction at the future time.
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1 - 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 4, 8 and 10 - 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,211,620 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the issued claims recite all of the limitations of the pending claims, using alternative wording. For example, the pending claims substitute the term “computing device” for the term “computer system”; substitute the term “future model execution time” for the term “delayed model execution time”; and substituting the term “probability prediction” for the term “injury probability”. These terms have the same meaning.
The table below shows the pending claims and their corresponding issued claims:
Pending Claims Issued Claims
1 1
2 2
3 1/3
4 14
5 15
6 1/3
7 1/4
8 8
9 10
10 11
11 12
12 13
13 12
14 14
15 15
16 12/16
17 12/17
18 8
19 10
20 11
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to John A. Pauls whose telephone number is (571) 270-5557. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon. - Fri. 8:00 - 5:00 Eastern. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Robert Morgan can be reached at (571) 272-6773.
Official replies to this Office action may now be submitted electronically by registered users of the EFS-Web system. Information on EFS-Web tools is available on the Internet at: http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/index.jsp. An EFS-Web Quick-Start Guide is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/portal/efs/quick-start.pdf.
Alternatively, official replies to this Office action may still be submitted by any one of fax, mail, or hand delivery. Faxed replies should be directed to the central fax at (571) 273-8300. Mailed replies should be addressed to “Commissioner for Patents, PO Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.” Hand delivered replies should be delivered to the “Customer Service Window, Randolph Building, 401 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.”
/JOHN A PAULS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3683
Date: 4 March, 2026