Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 19/041,050

LOOK-UP TABLE INITIALIZE

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Jan 30, 2025
Priority
May 27, 2019 — provisional 62/853,120 +3 more
Examiner
HUSON, ZACHARY K
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Texas Instruments Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allowance Rate
708 granted / 793 resolved
+29.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
9 currently pending
Career history
795
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
§103
38.3%
-1.7% vs TC avg
§102
32.4%
-7.6% vs TC avg
§112
6.1%
-33.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 793 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
CTNF 19/041,050 CTNF 84037 DETAILED ACTION Claims 1 – 20 are currently pending. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 1/30/2025, 5/27/2025 and 11/7/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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. 08-34 AIA Claim s 1 – 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1 - 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,242,852 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims are directed towards the same inventive concepts . Comparing claim 1 of the instant application to claim 1 of the ‘852 patent, both are directed towards a cache; and a processor coupled to the cache and configured to: based on an instruction that specifies a set of tables, an index associated with the set of tables, and a set of data, provide the set of data to the cache; cause the cache to duplicate the set of data; and cause the cache to store a respective copy of the set of data to a respective subset of each table of the set of tables, wherein the respective subset is based on the index specified by the instruction. The only read difference between the claims is that the instant application describes a device, while the ‘852 patent describes an integrated circuit. This difference does not make the claims patentably distinct. Dependent claims 2 – 10 are rejected for at least the reasons set forth above regarding claim 1. Comparing claim 11 of the instant application to claim 16 of the ‘852 patent, the claims are nearly identical. The only difference appears to be that the term “table instruction” is used in the ‘852 patent and the term “instruction” is used in the instant application. This difference does not make the claims patentably distinct. Dependent claims 12 – 20 are rejected for at least the reasons set forth above regarding claim 11. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY K HUSON whose telephone number is (571)270-3430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00 - 3:30 EST. 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, Idriss Alrobaye can be reached at (571) 270-1023. 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. /ZACHARY K HUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2181 Application/Control Number: 19/041,050 Page 2 Art Unit: 2181 Application/Control Number: 19/041,050 Page 3 Art Unit: 2181 Application/Control Number: 19/041,050 Page 4 Art Unit: 2181 Application/Control Number: 19/041,050 Page 5 Art Unit: 2181
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 30, 2025
Application Filed
May 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12743385
Symmetrical Control of Hardware Peripherals
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12737313
Translating Between CXL.mem and CXL.cache Read Transactions
1y 9m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12730645
DEVICE, METHOD AND SYSTEM TO CAPTURE OR RESTORE MICROARCHITECTURAL STATE OF A PROCESSOR CORE
3y 8m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12730640
TECHNIQUES FOR OPTIMIZING STORE OF COMMON VALUES TO MEMORY STRUCTURES
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12730635
VECTOR FLOATING-POINT CLASSIFICATION
1y 10m to grant Granted Sep 08, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+6.5%)
2y 3m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 793 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