Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/065,567

SEARCH AND SEMANTIC SIMILARITY DOMAIN DETERMINATION

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Feb 27, 2025
Examiner
LEROUX, ETIENNE PIERRE
Art Unit
2161
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Intuit Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
973 granted / 1100 resolved
+33.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
1119
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
§103
48.6%
+8.6% vs TC avg
§102
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
§112
12.6%
-27.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1100 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 Status Claims 1- 20 are pending. Claims 1-8 are rejected. Claims 9-20 are allowed. 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 1-8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,259,896 application 18/592,512 in view of Choudhary. 19/065,567 1. A method, comprising: 18/592,512 1. A method, comprising: 19/065,567 generating, by an embedding model, a user query embedding for a user query received from a user query answer service; 18/592,512 generating, by an embedding model, a new user query embedding for a new user query received from a user 19/065,567 obtaining, from a search engine index, an indexed user query matching the user query, a vector index corresponding to the indexed user query, and a relevancy score corresponding to the indexed user query; 18/592,512 obtaining, by a search engine from a search engine an indexed user query matching the new user query index 19/065,567 selecting, from a vector store, a vector structure corresponding to the vector index; 18/592,512 a first vector index corresponding to the indexed user query, and a relevancy score corresponding to the indexed user query selecting, from a plurality of vector structures in a vector store, a vector structure corresponding to the first vector index 19/065,567 obtaining, from the vector structure, a result embedding matching the user query embedding; 18/592,512 obtaining, from the vector structure, a result embedding matching the new user query embedding 19/065,567 transmitting, by the user query answer service, the result embedding to an answer generation model; and 18/592,512 transmitting, by a user query answer service to an answer generation model, the result embedding and 19/065,567 receiving, by the user query answer service, an answer to the user query from the answer generation model. 18/592,512 receiving, by the user query answer service, an answer to the new user query from the answer generation model 19/065,567 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: 18/592,512 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: 19/065,567 generating a result similarity score for the result embedding; 18/592,512 generating a result similarity score for the result embedding; 19/065,567 determining an index similarity score for the vector index based on the result similarity score; and 18/592,512 determining an index similarity score for the first vector index based on the result similarity score 19/065,567 determining a composite score corresponding to the vector index based on the relevancy score of the indexed user query and the index similarity score of the vector index. 18/592,512 determining a composite score corresponding to the first vector index based on the relevancy score of the indexed user query and the index similarity score of the first vector index. 19/065,567 3. The method of claim 2, further comprising: generating, by the answer generation model, the answer to the user query, based on the result embedding corresponding to the vector index, and responsive to the composite score being higher than a composite score threshold. 18/592,512 3. The method of claim 2, further comprising: generating, by the answer generation model, the answer to the new user query, based on the result embedding corresponding to the first vector index, and responsive to the composite score being higher than a composite score threshold. 19/065,567 4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating a result similarity score for the result embedding; determining an index similarity score for the vector index based on the result similarity score; determining a composite score for the vector index based on the relevancy score of the indexed user query and the index similarity score of the vector index; and obtaining an alternative result embedding responsive to the composite score being lower than a composite store threshold, wherein the answer generation model generates the answer to the user query based on the alternative result embedding. 18/592,512 4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating a result similarity score for the result embedding; determining an index similarity score for the first vector index based on the result similarity score; determining a composite score for the first vector index based on the relevancy score of the indexed user query and the index similarity score of the first vector index; and obtaining an alternative result embedding responsive to the composite score being lower than a composite store threshold, wherein the answer generation model generates the answer to the new user query based at least one alternative result embedding. 19/065,567 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating a result similarity score for the result embedding; determining an index similarity score for the vector index based on the result similarity score; determining a composite score for the vector index based on the relevancy score of the indexed user query and the index similarity score of the vector index; and initiating an iteration of feedback re-indexing for the search engine index responsive to the composite score being lower than a composite score threshold. 18/592,512 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating a result similarity score for the result embedding; determining an index similarity score for the first vector index based on the result similarity score; determining a composite score for the first vector index based on the relevancy score of the indexed user query and the index similarity score of the first vector index; and initiating an iteration of feedback re-indexing for the search engine index responsive to the composite score being lower than a composite score threshold. 19/065,567 6. The method of claim 5, wherein the feedback re-indexing comprises: obtaining a selected response corresponding to the user query; obtaining a second vector index corresponding to the selected response; updating a labeled dataset with the user query and the second vector index; and generating an updated search engine index based at least on the labeled dataset. 18/592,512 6. The method of claim 5, wherein the feedback re-indexing comprises: obtaining a selected response corresponding to the new user query; obtaining a second vector index corresponding to the selected response; updating a labeled dataset with the new user query and the second vector index; and generating an updated search engine index based at least on the labeled dataset. 19/065,567 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: populating the vector store during a population phase, wherein populating comprises: ingesting content corresponding to a content domain store from a data repository, and generating, by the embedding model, an embedding corresponding to an utterance of the content, and transmitting the embedding to the vector store. 18/592,512 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: populating the vector store during a population phase, wherein populating comprises: ingesting content corresponding to a content domain store from a data repository, and generating, by the embedding model, an embedding corresponding to an utterance of the content, and transmitting the embedding to the vector store. 19/065,567 8. The method of claim 7, further comprising: creating a new vector structure comprising: the embedding corresponding to the utterance, and a new vector index corresponding to the new vector structure, wherein the new vector index identifies the content domain store; and committing the new vector structure to the vector store. 18/592,512 8. The method of claim 7, further comprising: creating a new vector structure comprising: the embedding corresponding to the utterance, and a new vector index corresponding to the new vector structure, wherein the new vector index identifies the content domain store; and committing the new vector structure to the vector store. Continuing Data This application is a CON of 18/592,512 filed 2/29/2024 now PAT 12,259,896 Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: Regarding claim 1, the prior art does not teach, disclose or fairly suggest at least the following element of claim 1: “obtaining, from a search engine index, an indexed user query matching the user query, a vector index corresponding to the indexed user query, and a relevancy score corresponding to the indexed user query.” For the sake of completeness, consider Chowdhary’s disclosure in US PAT. No. 12,259,896, “obtaining, by a search engine from a search engine index an indexed user query matching the new user query, a first vector index corresponding to the indexed user query and a relevancy score corresponding to the indexed user query.” However, Chowdhary’s disclosure in US PAT. No. 12,259,896 is not prior art because the present application 19/065,567 is a continuation of US PAT. No. 12,259,896. Regarding independent claim 9, the prior art does not teach, disclose or fairly suggest at least the following element of claim 9, “selecting, for a response embedding of the set of responses embeddings, a vector structure from a vector store having an embedding matching the response embedding, to obtain a set of corresponding vector structures.” For the sake of completeness, consider Chowdhary’s disclosure in US PAT. No. 12,259,896, “select a vector structure corresponding to the first vector index from a plurality of vector structures in the vector store.” However, Chowdhary’s disclosure in US PAT. No. 12,259,896 is not prior art because the present application 19/065,567 is a continuation of US PAT. No. 12,259,896. Regarding independent claim 12, the prior art does not teach, disclose or fairly suggest at least the following element of claim 12, “the search engine is configured to cause the at least one computer processor to obtain an indexed user query matching the user query from a search engine index, a vector index corresponding to the indexed user query, and a relevancy score corresponding to the indexed user query.” For the sake of completeness, consider Chowdhary’s disclosure in US PAT. No. 12,259,896, “obtaining, by a search engine from a search engine index an indexed user query matching the new user query, a first vector index corresponding to the indexed user query and a relevancy score corresponding to the indexed user query.” However, Chowdhary’s disclosure in US PAT. No. 12,259,896 is not prior art because the present application 19/065,567 is a continuation of US PAT. No. 12,259,896. Sanz (US 12,008,026) claim 8 includes “wherein identifying of the one or more candidate content embedding vectors that match the query embedding vector includes determining by the one or more computing systems and for each of the one or more candidate content embedding vectors, that the content embedding vector has a degree of matching to the query embedding vector that exceeds a defined threshold.” Amity (US 2005/0138007) abstract discloses A search system includes a search engine to search through an index of documents and an index enhancer to enhance the index with at least some user queries. The index may include a listing of terms found in documents to be indexed and at least in user queries used to find said documents and a listing at least of how frequently such terms occurred in the documents and user queries. Kharbanda (US 2024/0403362) abstract discloses Furthermore, the system can determine one or more video results based on the video embeddings and the audio data. Subsequently, the system can transmit, to the user device, the one or more video results. Schillace (US 12,405,934) abstract discloses he content data associated with the content item may be provided to one or more semantic embedding models that generate semantic embeddings. From one or more of the semantic embedding models, one or semantic embeddings may be received. The one or more semantic embeddings may then be inserted into the embedding object memory. The semantic embeddings may be associated with respective indications corresponding to a reference to source data associated with the semantic embeddings. Further, the insertion may trigger a spatial storage operation to store a vector representation of the one or more semantic embeddings. A plurality of collections of stored embeddings may be received from the embedding object memory, based on a provided input, to determine an action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ETIENNE PIERRE LEROUX whose telephone number is (571)272-4022. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am to 4:30 pm. 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, Apu Mofiz can be reached at 571 272 4080. 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. /ETIENNE P LEROUX/Primary Examiner of Art Unit 2161
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 27, 2025
Application Filed
Dec 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Apr 08, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591806
OPTIMIZING CONTENT DISTRIBUTION USING A MODEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591863
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR USER COMMUNICATION IN A NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591598
Systems and Methods for Determining Entity Attribute Representations
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591831
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SYNCHRONIZING PROCESSING STATEMENT DEPLOYMENT ACROSS DIVERSE COMPUTER NETWORKS USING A THREE-TIERED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ARCHITECTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591614
SYNTHETIC CONTENT GENERATION BASED ON BLOCKCHAIN DATA
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
88%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+5.3%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1100 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